Abbreviations used here

[Mac]

I've been searching the forum for commonly used abbreviations and would appreciate if you guys can verify whether these are correct (and add any I may have missed).

*** TECHNICAL (grouped by similarity) ***

AM = angular movement
AV = angular velocity

CW = clockwise
CCW = counter clockwise

CF = centrifugal force
CP/CPF = centripetal force

CG/COG = center of gravity
CM/COM = center of mass

G = gravity
M = mass

OOB = out of balance
COOB = constantly out of balance
OOBW = out of balance wheel

PM = perpetual motion
PMM = perpetual motion machine


*** INTERNET SPEAK (grouped alphabetically) ***

BTW = by the way

IIRC = if I recall correctly
IMHO = in my humble opinion
IMO = in my opinion

LOL = laughing out loud

MLFA = my last failed attempt

ROFL = rolling on the floor laughing
(and that's far as I'm going with this one)

[EDITED for updates]

Thanks, Mac

[JuddBrooks]

Hope I don't mess up your thread but I wanted to comment on PM.

IMO - In my opinion
IMHO - In my humble Opinion

A gravity wheel has an input source. Gravity. It is not Perpetual Motion Machine.

Take a Gravity (Bessler) wheel into space and it would stop.

Bessler was not in error in 1717 since the definition of PM was not yet made clear.

Today, Scientifically, PM is defined as a 'device' that uses something within itself to power for an infinite length of time.

Set a solar panel in geo orbit above the earth where the sun always hits it and one might say PM. But once the sun dies out so does the panel stop producing. Drain the lake above a hydro dam and electricty stops. Same with a Bessler wheel. Once the gravity is taken away it would stop. They will operate for such a long time that it seems like PM to the average person who might use that 'phrase' but it would be incorrect and even worse deceptive to the 'trained'/'schooled' person, scientist, and other persons including Patent Office.

ANYONE using the PM word is doing EVERYONE involved in Gravity Engines a HUGH DIS-SERVICE.

Myself, I like to use the phrase "practical motion'. Solar, Wind, Hydro are Practical but not "TRULY" Perpetual. So will Gravity, Magnetism, and Water Pressure once the 'mystery' of Bessler is cracked.

Again, IHMO..
Sincerely
Judd

[scott]

CP = centripetal force

I've never seen that before and it looks wrong to me. I could see maybe using CP as a label in a vector diagram, but not as an abbreviation in a textual description.

PPM = perpetual motion machine

This is a mistake you will see a lot of people make here and elsewhere on the Internet. The correct abbreviation is PMM.

Great idea for a topic btw.

-Scott

P.S. Here are some more:

BTW = by the way
IIRC = if I recall correctly

[Michael]

Judd please, you would be doing yourself a great service and the community at large in which you have contact with if you studied physics and it's terminology/meanings, and why observations are defined the way they are. I realize most people on here think they are at the cutting edge of something revolutionary but you should realize that mainstream science was built by many many people who really were pioneering correct understandings. You could begin by drawing and understanding the absolute meaning of the relationships geometry reveals about lines, sides, and faces.

[Mac]

Hey Scott,

Yeah the PPM was a typo, sorry. I changed it.

I got the idea of CP from this post (I think anyway - had to search for it again):

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... idal#34409

Any clarifications are welcome, and I'll add new ones to the original post.

Found a couple more (or are these the same thing?):
AM = angular momentum
AV = angular velocity

Judd you're preaching to the choir, but this thread is about abbreviations.

Thanks, Mac

[LustInBlack]

Mac, I love your thread!

Your approch is the same I use.. I want the specs to be clear.

That's why I want to make a mech library.

You gave me the idea of instoring a database of 1, abbreviation/meanings,
2, Maths involved..

A kind of "Akashic" record so to speak.

[Fletcher]

OOB = Out Of Balance
COOB = Constantly OOB
OOBW = OOB Wheel

[rlortie]

Mac,

Found a couple more (or are these the same thing?):
AM = angular momentum
AV = angular velocity

IMO = it's my opinion, in my opinion

AM = Is the direction of a moving mass in relation to a relative reference point.

AV = the speed of said angular moving mass.

By the way I have always referred to Centripetal force as CP, never felt right about it, but it seemed to suit the consensus. If it is the opposite of CF maybe we should call it CpF.

Ralph

[Mac]

Thanks for the input guys, keep it coming. :)

Ralph - I changed "AM" to mean "angular movement" rather than "angular momentum" to reflect your explanation. It does seem to make more sense that way IMO. ;)

I also added CPF for centripetal force (CP/CPF). If that's not ok we'll change it.

Mac

[rlortie]

Mac,

Note that I suggested CpF rather than CPF. The "p" being none dominate. Thus we can keep 'CPF" open for future use if one should arise.

Ralph

[Mac]

Note that I suggested CpF rather than CPF.

Yep I noticed that. ;)

But I've also noticed that multi-case abbreviations usually get slaughtered anyway (especially by non-techs), and I can pretty much guarantee that "CpF" and "CPF" would get totally confused at times. Lol, possibly by me if no one else...

However, I'll add whatever technical abbreviations you guys agree upon.

Mac

[Madmax]

Mac,

I think that MLFA can be useful here too.
MLFA = My Last Failed Attempt :)

max

[ken_behrendt]

Judd wrote:

A gravity wheel has an input source. Gravity. It is not Perpetual Motion Machine.

I certainly agree that a gravity wheel is NOT a perpetual motion machine. It will, eventually, grind to a halt either from part failure or when it has no more energy to tap.

However, I do not believe that the input "source" is gravity. Rather, I am convinced that the kinetic energy such a device would output would actually come from energy associated with the mass of its internal weights. This process was understood as early as 1905. The energy comes from the weights themselves and not from the gravity field that the device is located in.


ken

[Mac]

Hey Max, I added MLFA under "internet speak". ;)

Thanks, Mac

[John Collins]

Ken wrote,

However, I do not believe that the input "source" is gravity. Rather, I am convinced that the kinetic energy such a device would output would actually come from energy associated with the mass of its internal weights. This process was understood as early as 1905. The energy comes from the weights themselves and not from the gravity field that the device is located in.

And this energy associated with the mass comes from.......?

John Collins