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 <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]> wrote:

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

Dave

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: H Veeder <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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. <[email protected]> 
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:[email protected]] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: [email protected]
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



        
                
                                                        




















Reply via email to