Marshall Dudley <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike Monett wrote:
>> Marshall Dudley <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > The changes in the gravity above the disks typically run from 3% > to 10% or so with the experiments that were run at Oak Ride Labs. Let's make a gravity wheel: http://www.keelynet.com/gravity/scwheel.gif I did a quick calculation in Mercury and put the results at the end. If we use a 10 inch diameter superconducting disk with liquid nitrogen cooling, and a 6 ft chord of a steel flywheel, your 10% reduction in gravity would provide a lifting force of 157.2 lb. If we offset this force 6 ft from the center of the flywheel, it would provide a torque of 943.23 ft/lb. If we limit the circumferential velocity to the maximum recommended value of 820 ft/sec for steel flywheels, this would produce 1167.29 RPM. With a torque of 943.23 ft/lb, this is 209.64 horsepower, or 156,390.9 Watts. We could get Edmund Scientific to supply the superconducting disks. A small generator to supply 10 Litres/day of liquid nitrogen would need only 2.5 kW, which is negligible compared to the 156kW produced: http://www.rigakumsc.com/cryo/nitrogen.html The flywheel would be 13.4 ft in diameter, 10 inches thick, and weigh 56,593.9 lb. If the steel cost was $1.63 per lb, the flywheel would cost $92,248.06, or about $0.589 per Watt. The complete installation would not add much to this value. This is a very attractive cost ratio, and it would immediately obsolete all current methods of generating power. The only problem is it is completely fictitious. The machine would be a perpetual motion machine, and is by definition impossible: "Perpetual motion machines (the Latin term perpetuum mobile is not uncommon) are a class of hypothetical machines which would produce useful energy in a way which would violate the established laws of physics. No genuine perpetual motion machine currently exists, and according to certain fundamental laws in physics they cannot exist. Specifically, perpetual motion machines would violate either the first or second laws of thermodynamics. Perpetual motion machines are divided into two subcategories defined by which law of thermodynamics would have to be broken in order for the device to be a true perpetual motion machine." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion You remember Uncle Al? Here are some of his comments along with others on Podkletnov: Posted by Uncle Al on Jul 29, 2002 at 16:56 Re: 'You canny change the laws of physics. Captain' (Wozza) Podkletnov is a fraud. Even his own work doesn't work in the presence of competent outside observers. Uncle Al http://www.scienceagogo.com/message_board/messages/6901.shtml Posted by Mike Kremer on Jul 29, 2002 at 23:53 Re: 'You canny change the laws of physics. Captain' (DA Morgan) We all debunked Podkletnov, January a year ago when even the Finnish scientists couldn't duplicate his work. http://www.scienceagogo.com/message_board/messages/6916.shtml Subject: Re: New Scientist article: Anti-gravity research on the rise From: Uncle Al <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 18:44:56 +0000 (UTC) [...] 1) Podkletnov et al. cannot reproduce their claims in the presence of a hostile (i.e., professional) audience. Cf: N-rays. A large volume of claimed observations has accumulated, none of it produced before neutral referees. 2) Nobody can reproduce Podkletnov's garage-scale experiment, even with $million budgets. You can bet the mortgage that both NASA and the DoD made/are making very sincere efforts. 3) The originally referenced "shieldings" are commensurate with the greater density of cold air (proximity to liquid nitrogen) and bouyancy, diamagnetic repulsion, and even Lenz' law inductance. A thermally and electromagnetically dirty environment is hostile to precise and accurate measurements. Try doing a weight or mass measurement at the mouth of an energized MRI magnet - and that is a static field. A tiny bit of (concealed) graphite or bismuth will give you wild numbers in the presence of magnetic field divergence. You can move a piece of either by repulsion with a pointy rare-earth magnet. 4) Podkletnov's claim of "beaming" the effect is unsatisfactory at face value. Take a vacuum cleaner hose. Can you "beam" lowered pressure? Try "beaming" cold, a Faraday cage, a Mu-metal or Co-netic alloy magnetic shield. Routing photons with a field is a non-trivial task - especially in rarefied media. Gravitons, if there are gravitons, will not be as easy to grab. If gravitation is the shape of spacetime, the disparity is greater: how does the beam know when to stop or how much to deposit its effect? If it scales with a test mass property, why don't we see a table of scaled effect? Does it shoot in both directions? What does "both" mean in context? 5) Stipulated, that Podkletnov can vary the gravitational potential energy of a mass by 0.3% at will. We immediately design a First law-violating electrical generator - a spring-loaded massive vertical piston mechanically coupled to the usual hardware. This is not supportive commentary. [...] Podkletnov cannot be reproduced. Whatever he observed, there exists no reason to believe what he claimed exists as such. All he has to do is invite some guys and their equipment to his lab and do his thing. For something that would overturn physics to its core, you'd think his welcome mat would be the size of a football field rather than a postage stamp. Uncle Al http://www.lepp.cornell.edu/spr/2002-08/msg0043391.html 2. PASCAL'S WAGER: THE PODKLETNOV GRAVITY SHIELD STRIKES OUT. In 1992, Russian physicist Eugene Podkletnov claimed that objects above a spinning superconducting disk show a 2 percent loss in weight. Why this should be so wasn't too clear, but it would be great for launching spacecraft, and you could build a perpetual motion machine. There are two possibilities: either this obscure Russian was mistaken, or the First Law of Thermodynamics is wrong. NASA put its money on Podkletnov (WN 15 Aug 97). Four years and $1M later, NASA thought maybe they saw a weight change of 2 parts per million, but couldn't be sure. "Maybe you need a bigger disk," Podkletnov suggested. That led to another $1M and another four years. Finally, at a conference on propulsion this year, NASA said that tests on the new shield were "inconclusive." That's NASA-talk for "it didn't work," but if NASA just said, "it didn't work," they would have to explain why they spent all that money an idea that violates the First Law. In fairness, however, we must point out that NASA also supported Ketterle's beautiful work on BE condensates. http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN01/wn101201.html So, Marshall, Podkletnov is just like thousands of other scam artists trying to fleece money from willing victims. And there are millions of people who lack the education or common sense to see through claims like these, and will lose everything they invest. And that scientist at Oak Ridge was just pulling your leg to see how much you would believe. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > If balances are used, the measurements can easily be made for > forces of one part in 100 million That's 10 parts per billion. NIST only goes to 50 ppb at 1kg: Typical relative standard uncertainties range from 50 x 10-9 at 1 kg, up to 330 x 10-6 at 1 mg, and 0.2 x 10-6 at 10 kg. http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/230/233/calibrations/mechanical/mass.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [...] > Gecko feet provide a van der Waals adhesion which is sufficient to > hold up a gecko, and thus is very easy to measure. A force > sufficient to hold up full sized lizard is easy to measure (and in > fact research has shown that all the setae on a gecho's foot could > support 200 to 300 pounds), which proves that despite your claim, I made no claim about van der Waals. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [...] > Most attempts to measure gravity waves have used massive objects > seperated at a distance, and attempted to measure a change in > distance between them. They are only capable of measuring gravity > waves with a wavelength approximately the distance between them. Where do you get this idea? Fomalont et al measured the relativistic light deflection of the quasar J0842+1835 as Jupiter passed within 3.7' on 2002 September 8, 2002: Authors: E. B. Fomalont, S. M. Kopeikin Journal-ref: Astrophys.J. 598 (2003) 704-711 We have determined the relativistic light deflection of the quasar J0842+1835 as Jupiter passed within 3.7' on 2002 September 8, by measuring the time delay using the VLBA and Effelsberg radio telescopes at 8.4 GHz. At closest approach, General Relativity (GR) predicts a radial (static) deflection of 1190 microarcsec, and tangential (retarded) deflection in the direction of Jupiter's motion of 51 microarcsec. Our experiment achieved an rms position error of <10 microarcsec, and measured this retarded deflection to be 0.98 +/- 0.19 (rms error) times that predicted by GR. The increase positional accuracy for this VLBI phase referencing experiment was achieved by using two calibrator sources. Comments on the interpretation of this experiment are given. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0302294 Their measurement shows gravity waves travel at the speed of light. Uncle Al agrees. > However since gravity travels infinitely fast (as opposed to the > speed of light), most likely gravity waves travel at the same > infinite speed, and thus the wavelength is infinite, making > measurement of them by this means an absolute impossibility no > matter how far apart the weights are. Marshall, your physics is abysmal. Again, here's Uncle Al: Subject: Re: Gravitational wave velocity: Measurable? From: Uncle Al <[email protected]> Date: 10 Mar 2004 06:24:55 -0500 [...] There is no evidence that gravitation or gravitation waves propagate at any velocity other than lightspeed. http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0212121 Sergei Kopeikin http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0301145 Clifford Will http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0302294 Kopeikin's results http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0302462 Kopeikin's analysis of results http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0303346 Faber's dissent re parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) model http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0304006 Stuart Samuel's invalid analysis of Kopeikin Uncle Al http://www.lepp.cornell.edu/spr/2004-03/msg0059177.html MIT and Cal Tech have finished building LIGO at a cost of $345 million or so. They anticipate linking their systems to others around the world. This will provide the additional time delays needed to determine the direction of the source. Phase II should start around 2010: "Advanced LIGO should present an amazing increase in technology and detection sensitivity. The noise sensitivity will be improved over the current LIGO sensitivity by a factor of 10. Advanced LIGO will be able to see neutron star binary inspirals out to a distance of 350 Mpc (assuming optimal alignment), with an expected event rate between 2 per year to as many as 3 per day (there is much uncertainty in these rates). Back hole - black hole binary inspirals should be detectable out to a distance of 1.7 Gpc, with an event rate between 1 per month to 1 per hour. Black hole - neutron star binary inspirals will be detectable out to 750 Mpc, with an event rate between 1 per year to 1 per day." http://www.ligo.org/pdf_public/christensen.pdf If your claim were true, and gravity speed was infinite, there would be no time delay to measure, and all the money spent would be wasted. There are a lot of very smart people working on these systems, and I have every confidence their detectors will work. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [..] > I agree that the shuttle program is a waste of money. It SHOULD be > scrapped for more economical and reliable solutions. > Marshall Finally got one right:) OK, enough of this high tech stuff. Let's get back to cs machines. I have great pleasure to announce the design and construction of a cs generator that breaks the Nernst limit of 22uS. This was possible before, but the previous process wasted a huge amount of silver. My latest machine produces 2 litres in 8 hrs. The cs is clear with very slight Tyndall, indicating low AgOH production. It measures 32.8 uS. There is only a trace of AgOH on the anode, and a trace of silver plateout on the cathode. This is negligible waste of silver. There is a sharp drop in the first 24 hrs, but since one other company is able to produce 30uS cs, I feel it will be possible to track down the cause and reduce or eliminate it. Regards, Mike Monett Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution: http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators: http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler: http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ; Gravity Wheel Calculations ; Roger Schafly's Mercury is available at ; http://www.mindspring.com/~schlafly/eureka.htm ; Unit Conversions Circumfer = pi * FWDia ; Flywheel Circumference DollWatt = FWCost / Watts ; Cost in Dollars per Watt FWCost = MetalCost * FWWeight ; Cost of Flywheel FWDia = 2 * sqrt((TorqueArm/2)^2 + LiftHght^2) ; Flywheel Dia FWVeloc = Circumfer * RPM / 60 ; Flywheel Tip Speed ft/sec FWVol = pi * (FWDia * 12)^2 * LiftDia / 4 ; Flywheel Volume FWWeight = MetDensity * FWVol ; Flywheel Weight in lb HP = LiftTorq * RPM / 5252 ; Horsepower LiftForce = LiftPct * LiftWgt ; Lift Force in lb LiftTorq = LiftForce * TorqueArm ; Lift Torque in ft/lb LiftVol = 1/4 * pi * LiftDia^2 * (LiftHght * 12) ; Lift Volume LiftWgt = MetDensity * LiftVol ; Lift Cylinder Weight in lb Watts = HP * 746 ; Power in Watts ; Parameters FWVeloc = 820 ; flywheel tip speed ft/sec LiftDia = 10 ; lift cyl diameter in inches LiftHght = 6 ; lift cyl height in ft LiftPct = 0.1 ; lift force in percent MetalCost = 1.63 ; metal cost in $/lb TorqueArm = 6 ; torque arm in ft MetDensity = 0.278 ; metal density in lb/cuin ; Solution Circumfer = 42.148888 DollWatt = 0.5898556 FWCost = 92248.067 FWDia = 13.416407 FWVeloc = 820.00000 FWVol = 203575.20 FWWeight = 56593.906 HP = 209.63929 LiftDia = 10.000000 LiftForce = 157.20529 LiftHght = 6.0000000 LiftPct = 0.1000000 LiftTorq = 943.23177 LiftVol = 5654.8667 LiftWgt = 1572.0529 MetalCost = 1.6300000 MetDensity = 0.2780000 RPM = 1167.2905 TorqueArm = 6.0000000 Watts = 156390.91 -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
