Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
This must be a scam. As Jed said, at the point where the craft is going downwind at the speed of the wind, the relative wind across the propeller would be zero so it could not accelerate from this point on. If it did, the force from the prop would reverse anyway. Even more obviously, if it can accelerate from a position of zero relative wind then one could start it off in no wind conditions and it would accelerate - perpetual motion just isn't that easy! Nick Palmer On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it Blogspot - Sustainability and stuff according to Nick Palmer http://nickpalmer.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
I haven't been able to get a clarification to a vexing question concerning Mercury's perihelion precession-al orbit, specifically the angular direction such observations manifests as. For example, hypothetically speaking here, let's pretend we have a space ship and have stationed it approximately 90 million miles distant from the sun. Also, our spaceship is not within the ecliptic plane but positioned at one of the Sun's poles. Mercury is observed to be orbiting around the sun in a clock-wise pattern. Under such a scenario what would the angular direction of Mercury's perihelion precession manifest as? I -suspect- the perihelion PRE-cession of Mercury's orbit implies that the phenomenon would manifest in a counter-clockwise direction, but I haven't been able to get a clear answer to that one. Pardon my ignorance, on this matter. I'm wondering out loud, here: Does the term PREcession mean: in the opposite direction of... as to the orbital direction? Mongo don't know. I actually have some legitimate curiosity in regards to this question. I have been running computer simulations based on the simple rules of celestial mechanics for several years now. My CM simulations pertaining to most of the ELLEPTICAL orbits I've plotted always show a distinct counter-rotational pattern, meaning the pattern of successive elliptical orbits that have been plotted are always in the opposite direction that the satellite body is orbiting around the central mass point. Just to be clear on this point, in no way am I attempting to imply that my simple CM simulations have anything directly to do with Einstein's General Relativity, which famously predicted Mercury's perihelion precession around the sun accurately. Can someone clarify my precession confusion? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:01:42 +0100, you wrote: This must be a scam. As Jed said, at the point where the craft is going downwind at the speed of the wind, the relative wind across the propeller would be zero so it could not accelerate from this point on. If it did, the force from the prop would reverse anyway. Even more obviously, if it can accelerate from a position of zero relative wind then one could start it off in no wind conditions and it would accelerate - perpetual motion just isn't that easy! --- I've attached a drawing which shows basically how Thin Air Design's Blackbird vehicle works. Note that with the wind pushing the cart and the pitch of the propeller as shown, the wind would, intuitively, be forcing the propeller to rotate counter-clockwise as viewed from the rear of the cart. However, such is not the case. What's really happening is that the wind is pushing on the prop, forcing the cart to move forward, and the torque generated by the wheels is coupled to the prop in such a way as to cause the prop to rotate clockwise when viewed from the rear. This direction of rotation makes the prop a pusher, and will increase the apparent force of the wind. As long as the wind is blowing from the rear, the cart will accelerate until it reaches wind speed, when the wind speed will effectively be zero. However, because of the prop's action as a pusher, the cart will be going a little faster than wind speed, at wind speed. Then, as soon as the prop feels the headwind it'll stop being a propeller and will become a turbine, driving the wheels and accelerating into the headwind until, eventually, everything settles out and the cart reaches its speed limit. --- --- JF
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
From John Fields, ... Note that with the wind pushing the cart and the pitch of the propeller as shown, the wind would, intuitively, be forcing the propeller to rotate counter-clockwise as viewed from the rear of the cart. However, such is not the case. What's really happening is that the wind is pushing on the prop, forcing the cart to move forward, and the torque generated by the wheels is coupled to the prop in such a way as to cause the prop to rotate clockwise when viewed from the rear. This direction of rotation makes the prop a pusher, and will increase the apparent force of the wind. As long as the wind is blowing from the rear, the cart will accelerate until it reaches wind speed, when the wind speed will effectively be zero. However, because of the prop's action as a pusher, the cart will be going a little faster than wind speed, at wind speed. Then, as soon as the prop feels the headwind it'll stop being a propeller and will become a turbine, driving the wheels and accelerating into the headwind until, eventually, everything settles out and the cart reaches its speed limit. Well, I'll be keelhauled! Thanks for the clarification John. My previous suggestion of using a control vehicle fitted with a Viking-like sale is woefully inappropriate. It would be more accurate to describe this vehicle's prop as TACKING through the wind. As most sailors know, a sailboat tends to sail the fastest when sailing at an angle of around 45 degrees INTO THE WIND. (I think maximum dynamics is approx 45 degrees into the wind. Feel free to correct me on that point, maitees.) The point being: Sailing closer into the wind seems counter intuitive but it's the truth - insofar as sailboats are concerned. I can see it now. Sailors take note! This opens up a whole new dimension to regatta races. You heard it here first! Where's my parrot. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
Sailboats vary enormously in terms of their favored point of sailing. I would guess that most sailboats do best with the wind on their beam (90 deg.) My boat is best on that point, and I can also sail into the wind to about 28 degrees without pinching, which is exceptionally. Downwind is slow for me, so I often tack downwind, keeping main and gennie filled. I wonder what race committees will say when a sailor shows up with this rig. Thinking of John's explanation, though, I suppose it will not work as there won't be any torque transmission from the wheels to the prop. Right, John? Cheers, Lawry On Sep 22, 2010, at 1:02 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: From John Fields, ... Note that with the wind pushing the cart and the pitch of the propeller as shown, the wind would, intuitively, be forcing the propeller to rotate counter-clockwise as viewed from the rear of the cart. However, such is not the case. What's really happening is that the wind is pushing on the prop, forcing the cart to move forward, and the torque generated by the wheels is coupled to the prop in such a way as to cause the prop to rotate clockwise when viewed from the rear. This direction of rotation makes the prop a pusher, and will increase the apparent force of the wind. As long as the wind is blowing from the rear, the cart will accelerate until it reaches wind speed, when the wind speed will effectively be zero. However, because of the prop's action as a pusher, the cart will be going a little faster than wind speed, at wind speed. Then, as soon as the prop feels the headwind it'll stop being a propeller and will become a turbine, driving the wheels and accelerating into the headwind until, eventually, everything settles out and the cart reaches its speed limit. Well, I'll be keelhauled! Thanks for the clarification John. My previous suggestion of using a control vehicle fitted with a Viking-like sale is woefully inappropriate. It would be more accurate to describe this vehicle's prop as TACKING through the wind. As most sailors know, a sailboat tends to sail the fastest when sailing at an angle of around 45 degrees INTO THE WIND. (I think maximum dynamics is approx 45 degrees into the wind. Feel free to correct me on that point, maitees.) The point being: Sailing closer into the wind seems counter intuitive but it's the truth - insofar as sailboats are concerned. I can see it now. Sailors take note! This opens up a whole new dimension to regatta races. You heard it here first! Where's my parrot. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
From Lawry, ... I wonder what race committees will say when a sailor shows up with this rig. Thinking of John's explanation, though, I suppose it will not work as there won't be any torque transmission from the wheels to the prop. Paddle wheels! My parrot can squawk out Steamboat Willy better than yours! Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
Here is a pretty good description of how it works: http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/12/the_real_bozo_attempts_to_aton.php Ron --On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:12 PM -0400 Lawrence de Bivort debiv...@evolutionaryservices.org wrote: Sailboats vary enormously in terms of their favored point of sailing. I would guess that most sailboats do best with the wind on their beam (90 deg.) My boat is best on that point, and I can also sail into the wind to about 28 degrees without pinching, which is exceptionally. Downwind is slow for me, so I often tack downwind, keeping main and gennie filled. I wonder what race committees will say when a sailor shows up with this rig. Thinking of John's explanation, though, I suppose it will not work as there won't be any torque transmission from the wheels to the prop. Right, John? Cheers, Lawry On Sep 22, 2010, at 1:02 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: From John Fields, ... Note that with the wind pushing the cart and the pitch of the propeller as shown, the wind would, intuitively, be forcing the propeller to rotate counter-clockwise as viewed from the rear of the cart. However, such is not the case. What's really happening is that the wind is pushing on the prop, forcing the cart to move forward, and the torque generated by the wheels is coupled to the prop in such a way as to cause the prop to rotate clockwise when viewed from the rear. This direction of rotation makes the prop a pusher, and will increase the apparent force of the wind. As long as the wind is blowing from the rear, the cart will accelerate until it reaches wind speed, when the wind speed will effectively be zero. However, because of the prop's action as a pusher, the cart will be going a little faster than wind speed, at wind speed. Then, as soon as the prop feels the headwind it'll stop being a propeller and will become a turbine, driving the wheels and accelerating into the headwind until, eventually, everything settles out and the cart reaches its speed limit. Well, I'll be keelhauled! Thanks for the clarification John. My previous suggestion of using a control vehicle fitted with a Viking-like sale is woefully inappropriate. It would be more accurate to describe this vehicle's prop as TACKING through the wind. As most sailors know, a sailboat tends to sail the fastest when sailing at an angle of around 45 degrees INTO THE WIND. (I think maximum dynamics is approx 45 degrees into the wind. Feel free to correct me on that point, maitees.) The point being: Sailing closer into the wind seems counter intuitive but it's the truth - insofar as sailboats are concerned. I can see it now. Sailors take note! This opens up a whole new dimension to regatta races. You heard it here first! Where's my parrot. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:12:27 -0400, you wrote: Sailboats vary enormously in terms of their favored point of sailing. I would guess that most sailboats do best with the wind on their beam (90 deg.) My boat is best on that point, and I can also sail into the wind to about 28 degrees without pinching, which is exceptionally. Downwind is slow for me, so I often tack downwind, keeping main and gennie filled. I wonder what race committees will say when a sailor shows up with this rig. Thinking of John's explanation, though, I suppose it will not work as there won't be any torque transmission from the wheels to the prop. Right, John? --- I think so since, even if the prop was coupled to an underwater screw, the coeffiction of friction between the water and the screw would be so much weaker than that between a wheel and the ground that it would be hard to keep the prop from turning the wrong way initially. --- JF
Re: [Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
I haven't been able to get a clarification to a vexing question concerning Mercury's perihelion precession-al orbit, specifically the angular direction such observations manifests as. For example, hypothetically speaking here, let's pretend we have a space ship and have stationed it approximately 90 million miles distant from the sun. Also, our spaceship is not within the ecliptic plane but positioned at one of the Sun's poles. Mercury is observed to be orbiting around the sun in a clock-wise pattern. Under such a scenario what would the angular direction of Mercury's perihelion precession manifest as? I -suspect- the perihelion PRE-cession of Mercury's orbit implies that the phenomenon would manifest in a counter-clockwise direction, but I haven't been able to get a clear answer to that one. Pardon my ignorance, on this matter. I'm wondering out loud, here: Does the term PREcession mean: in the opposite direction of... as to the orbital direction? Mongo don't know. Neither. Precession can be either prograde or retrograde. Mercury's perihelion precession is prograde, if I'm not mistaken. The relativistic component, due to the field curvature, is also prograde. Btw, google Miles Mathis, for an entertaining read. A surprising finding.
Re: [Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
I haven't been able to get a clarification to a vexing question concerning Mercury's perihelion precession-al orbit, specifically the angular direction such observations manifests as. For example, hypothetically speaking here, let's pretend we have a space ship and have stationed it approximately 90 million miles distant from the sun. Also, our spaceship is not within the ecliptic plane but positioned at one of the Sun's poles. Mercury is observed to be orbiting around the sun in a clock-wise pattern. Under such a scenario what would the angular direction of Mercury's perihelion precession manifest as? I -suspect- the perihelion PRE-cession of Mercury's orbit implies that the phenomenon would manifest in a counter-clockwise direction, but I haven't been able to get a clear answer to that one. Pardon my ignorance, on this matter. I'm wondering out loud, here: Does the term PREcession mean: in the opposite direction of... as to the orbital direction? Mongo don't know. Neither. Precession can be either prograde or retrograde. Mercury's perihelion precession is prograde, if I'm not mistaken. I am. Mercury's perihelion advance is retrograde. It happens in the same direction than Earth's axial precession, which is retrograde. See the table called Sources of the precession of perihelion for Mercury in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity All effects add up.
Re: [Vo]:Downwind Faster than the Wind (DWFTTW)
Interesting effects from filming propellers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Px9EAhyssfeature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Px9EAhyssfeature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T055cp-JFUA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T055cp-JFUA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVwmtwZLG88feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVwmtwZLG88feature=related On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:23 AM, John Fields jfie...@austininstruments.comwrote: On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:12:27 -0400, you wrote: Sailboats vary enormously in terms of their favored point of sailing. I would guess that most sailboats do best with the wind on their beam (90 deg.) My boat is best on that point, and I can also sail into the wind to about 28 degrees without pinching, which is exceptionally. Downwind is slow for me, so I often tack downwind, keeping main and gennie filled. I wonder what race committees will say when a sailor shows up with this rig. Thinking of John's explanation, though, I suppose it will not work as there won't be any torque transmission from the wheels to the prop. Right, John? --- I think so since, even if the prop was coupled to an underwater screw, the coeffiction of friction between the water and the screw would be so much weaker than that between a wheel and the ground that it would be hard to keep the prop from turning the wrong way initially. --- JF
Re: [Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
Mauro, Thanks for pointing me to the analysis work of Mathis. At present, I don't know if I can make practical use of his mathematical findings or not. It's probably going to make my brain hurt for quite a spell while attempting to get the gist of it all. To clarify what I have been doing: For several years now I have been researching what I have assumed is probably considered by most an uninteresting aspect of Newtonian based Celestial Mechanics, (CM). More to the point, I have focused primarily on computational feed-back loops where chaos is introduced into the solution. I've been plotting the chaotic results for some time now. No doubt, much of this work is related to emergent behavior, fractals, and what-not. It would not surprise me if some of Wolfram's work may have occasionally touched on what I have been studying. (Mike Carroll brought Worlfram's work to my attention.) Serendipitously, I recently discovered that Wolfram used his Mathematica software to study the characteristics of the empty foci belonging to a classic elliptical shaped satellite/planetary orbit. I was gratified to discover that the results Wolfram's Mathematica produced seemed to mirror some of my own independently researched findings. I have assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that the specific CM branch I'm studying (the chaotic aspect) is probably considered uninteresting and not of much practical value to most scientists researchers. I assume so because of the fact that when it comes to accurately plotting the orbits of celestial bodies like planets, moons, and satellites the last thing one wants to do is introduce the effects of chaos into the algorithm! For obvious reasons the effects of chaos must be kept at a minimum in order to accurately plot a future position of a celestial body. This is accomplished by making sure the computational iterative samples one feeds into the algorithm are sufficiently small, from plotted point to the next plotted point. Things can quickly get squirrely as one's satellite approaches the main attractor body, and the plotted point-to-point positions increase in distance from each other geometrically. But there by the Grace of God go I. I've discovered that within the unpredictable realms of chaos a wealth of strange and weird-like behavior is worth exploring. At the razor's edge, where the boundary between Order and Chaos meet, I find tantalizing behavior. My chaotic research continues. I hope to eventually put some of my findings out on the net. Much more work needs to be done... It's daunting. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
Hi, I'm in the same situation at the moment regarding the work of Mathis. I've just found out about his, at least at first sight, surprising and impressive body of work, when doing research to answer your question. Regarding your research: We talked here on vortex-l in the past about so called chaotic (stochastic) behavior. It is my understanding that if it were not for stochastic phenomena, the solar system would be dead long ago, i.e. everything would have collapsed into stability. It's due to the fact that always new small impulses are added to or produced in the system, that the planets continue moving in their orbits. If you carry the CM computations far enough, everything eventually stalls, or collapses. So, your addition of small chaotic perturbations could be closer to the truth than what is normally assumed. I've also ran Newtonian simulations of the solar system in the past, to observe the effect of outer bodies on the perihelion of the orbits of the inner planets, with practically null results. If your addition of small chaotic perturbations can in some cases model the advance of Mercury's perihelion, by example, that's would be a very valuable result. And the line of research in itself is very interesting. At a given point, you would have to consider too how those chaotic effects could take place in the solar system. And of course, I think that it would be also very interesting to know what kind of effects you have modeled, or produced. Regards, Mauro On 09/22/2010 06:13 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Mauro, Thanks for pointing me to the analysis work of Mathis. At present, I don't know if I can make practical use of his mathematical findings or not. It's probably going to make my brain hurt for quite a spell while attempting to get the gist of it all. To clarify what I have been doing: For several years now I have been researching what I have assumed is probably considered by most an uninteresting aspect of Newtonian based Celestial Mechanics, (CM). More to the point, I have focused primarily on computational feed-back loops where chaos is introduced into the solution. I've been plotting the chaotic results for some time now. No doubt, much of this work is related to emergent behavior, fractals, and what-not. It would not surprise me if some of Wolfram's work may have occasionally touched on what I have been studying. (Mike Carroll brought Worlfram's work to my attention.) Serendipitously, I recently discovered that Wolfram used his Mathematica software to study the characteristics of the empty foci belonging to a classic elliptical shaped satellite/planetary orbit. I was gratified to discover that the results Wolfram's Mathematica produced seemed to mirror some of my own independently researched findings. I have assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that the specific CM branch I'm studying (the chaotic aspect) is probably considered uninteresting and not of much practical value to most scientists researchers. I assume so because of the fact that when it comes to accurately plotting the orbits of celestial bodies like planets, moons, and satellites the last thing one wants to do is introduce the effects of chaos into the algorithm! For obvious reasons the effects of chaos must be kept at a minimum in order to accurately plot a future position of a celestial body. This is accomplished by making sure the computational iterative samples one feeds into the algorithm are sufficiently small, from plotted point to the next plotted point. Things can quickly get squirrely as one's satellite approaches the main attractor body, and the plotted point-to-point positions increase in distance from each other geometrically. But there by the Grace of God go I. I've discovered that within the unpredictable realms of chaos a wealth of strange and weird-like behavior is worth exploring. At the razor's edge, where the boundary between Order and Chaos meet, I find tantalizing behavior. My chaotic research continues. I hope to eventually put some of my findings out on the net. Much more work needs to be done... It's daunting. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:?CENSORSHIP? re: NASA's BPP Russian version
Friends: Vortex-l was(maybe) censored from publishing more on the R D update on Russia's version of NASA's BPP(misnomered 'Anti-grav'). This is pregnant with significance. Having the 'Heavy-hitters' shut-down the 'talk' is a tacit admission that they have 'for a while now' been doing much more than talking. . . . methinks that the Russians will soon unveil superfast/hypergrav-drive wingless/silent-aircraft for commerical use at the next international airshow. That the weaponized end of these technologies is a quasi-perfected R D 'done-deal' goes without saying. . . . and censorship at this point; will soon be revealed to be pointless at this stage. Again dear friends; 'Once more into the breach!'~:-) Since the last article regarding the Russian version of what began in America as NASA'S BPP/Break-through Propulsion Project in Vortex-L has been (possibly)Silenced-Censored internationally/DARPA etc. relative to the contents of said articles! Silence says more than 'words,' methinks! Jack~:-) Zhirnovsky a la' Russia has been spouting-off that 'Russia was 'back' as a Super-Power'(aka the coming 4th-Reich predicted out of future/now- Russia by Werner Von Braun) and Russia is back because Zhirnovsky's/Putin's (fascist)Russia now controls Gravity a la' limitless Power-grid power advanced Hyperspeed-Propulsion (aka alleged Vril-Power/Advanced Propulsion wingless Craft etc. a la' circa WW-II-Deutschland) and the 'work' a la' these latest articles on the Norway-Spiral BPP were initialized from this most recent article that was silenced. Reiterating: The origins of Russia's first successful Hyperspace accessing SuperFluid-Hi-density-EM Toroid/Plasma-Breach Reactor stem from the same origin as this latest article referencing their startling success in this Hyperdimensional Torsion physics field. We were 'all' supposed to be 'friends' then. . . oops; but regardless, it now is all fact Shrodinger's 'cat' is out-of-the-bag; and this gato is on steroids he's from the 'Matrix' and packing an Uzi while imbibing copius quantities of Vodka . . . ~:-) Cheers Gents;) Jack~:-)
Re: [Vo]:Mercury's perihelion precession, a question for Vort
On 09/22/2010 07:47 PM, Mauro Lacy wrote: Hi, I'm in the same situation at the moment regarding the work of Mathis. I've just found out about his, at least at first sight, surprising and impressive body of work, when doing research to answer your question. Well, it's certainly not very difficult to recognize the work of a genius.
