Fictitiousness

[cloud camper]

Well this is fantastic progress!

Now we know that JM only told one lie at a time.

So can we extrapolate that in the future, no fabrication about runners will
be told more than once?

[jim_mich]

Cloud camper, your conduct, which is contrary to these terms of use, has been reported.

Well this is fantastic progress!

Now we know that JM only told one lie at a time.

So can we extrapolate that in the future, no fabrication about runners will
be told more than once?

This post is harassment toward me.
This post is cloud camper stalking me.
This post is tortious, as cloud camper's wrongful continual harassment interferes with my posting to this forum.
This post is defamatory.
This post is libelous as it is a malicious statement meant only to harm my reputation.
This post is offensive to me since it is a continuation of cloud camper's posting of abusive, harassing, stalking, tortious, defamatory, libelous posts directed personally toward me.

I've repeatedly asked cloud camper to stop such behavior, but he insist on continuing to harass me.

[rlortie]

Jim_Mich,

What happened to your own statement: "End of rant. Let's get back to Bessler related discussions".

Did not last long did it! Can you not ignore the source and work on rebuilding your peer image?

Ralph

[jim_mich]

Very simple, Ralph,
I was again stalked and harassed by cloud camper. If he would simply cease and desist from attacking me, then we indeed could get back to Bessler related discussions.

[rlortie]

Jim_Mich,

Ever since your divorce you have been sliding downhill, I have tried to support you, even by private mail to no avail. I will try again to enlighten you!

This post is harassment toward me.

So ignore it, I do and so will any other member with integrity that sees no reason to jump in the barrel you have placed yourself in.

This post is cloud camper stalking me.

So let him stalk, if you consider the source and ignore, he will be digging hsi own hole! when he realizes he can no longer ruffle your feathers he will quit and stop digging.

This post is tortuous, as cloud camper's wrongful continual harassment interferes with my posting to this forum.

How can it interfere with your posting if you ignore him? IMO you have over the years made statements that you have failed to fulfill, and lets say that you have been known to stretch the truth considered as outright lies by some.

The pictures you posted as stated are of the past and their is nothing that would imply any builds on a motion wheel. All you show is a couple of simple made stands and a woodpile.

This post is defamatory.

Yes it is! but it is not without a foundation that you, yourself have conceived. Forget it and move on, like the alluvial sands of time it will eventually blow over!

This post is libelous as it is a malicious statement meant only to harm my reputation.

The claims of one man who has yet to prove himself of being closer to solving the problem is not going to harm your reputation. if you ignore him.
As previously stated your peers that matter will consider the source and it will blow over.

This post is offensive to me since it is a continuation of cloud camper's posting of abusive, harassing, stalking, tortious, defamatory, libelous posts directed personally toward me.

So ignore him and others will follow suit. Look upon him as just another disgruntled member who lacks the resources, skills and empirical experience to build his own runner.

I've repeatedly asked cloud camper to stop such behavior, but he insist on continuing to harass me.

As long as you keep feeding the birds, the are going to continue shitting on your porch. Grow up, find your backbone, drop the "clod camper" innuendo as it is an immature action on your part.

This scenario reminds me of an eighth grade bully in a leather jacket finding a less aggressive and weak student he can continually pick on and get away with it. You either ignore him and stay clear or build the fortitude to take him head on. In most cases the wimp will win as the bully is only a bully to those who are less of a man than those of his own size and status.

I personally do not believe you have diddly-squat related to a motion concept wheel design, yet I am willing to collaborate with you regarding your ideas if you actually have any.

This so called "Fictitiousness" thread got my attention and I am interested. It elaborates on my own research of using molecular mass as a builder of rotational Ke powered by Bernoulli's and Euler's laws and theories and the works of William Kenrick.

Ralph

[ovyyus]

So it's not harassment when JM constantly denounces those searching for an impossible gravity solution, but it is harassment when CC constantly denounces JM's search for an impossible inertia solution? Oh, the silliness of it all.

[rlortie]

Bill,

You go that right! It is said you cannot burn the candle on both ends!

If your going to research something you have to keep your mind, ears and eyes open. Sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming; NO! No! No! is not going to buy it for either end!

[ovyyus]

...

[eccentrically1]

It's not cloud camper's idea that all forces cancel in an unpowered structured (I assume he means unpowered externally). It's the universe's idea. Inertial forces aren't fictitious, they are provided by the universe, if you prefer, but the universe also provides the forces that opposes inertia's force equally and in the opposite direction.

Fictitious forces are also called reactive, so the active force is the universe's opposing force to the inertia.
This fact, that I don't have to prove do I, assures that the only means to rotate an inert wheel made of wood or plastic or whatever, is by external means. Unless Bessler was rotating his wheels - overbalancing their weights - with some kind of internal fuel, then it had to have come from an external source. The universe demands this relationship, not cloud, or me, or Bill or whoever.

Motion, any motion as I've tried to show on this thread a few post back, is entirely dependent on energy conversion.

Forces - according to modern theory - are ALL fictitious including gravity, EM and nuclear forces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force#Fictitious_forces

In general relativity, gravity becomes a fictitious force that arises in situations where spacetime deviates from a flat geometry. As an extension, Kaluza–Klein theory and string theory ascribe electromagnetism and the other fundamental forces respectively to the curvature of differently scaled dimensions, which would ultimately imply that all forces are fictitious.

We don't need to go there though, it's enough to know that forces cancel each other.

One more thing.
Anyone who thinks if they share their idea about how Bessler might have done it, that they would then lose their patent rights, it's obvious their idea wouldn't be rejected by the patent office. You can't have a patent for PM. So stop pretending you have a PM wheel. We know you don't! More importantly, the universe knows you don't.

That's the end of my rant related to Bessler's wheel. Sorry if it was long or skeptical.

[jim_mich]

OK

[Gill Simo]

It's the universe's idea?
It's your idea, most everyone's idea, that it's the universe's idea, nothing more...nothing less surely?
And that leaves you all with no idea, other than to knock anybody else's idea, apparently!
My best idea is for you all to read the signature below, over & over, until it finally sinks in.

[rlortie]

"All you think you know is purely a result of your ignorance."

Or should that read "arrogance"?

The art of understanding is that reality does not dictate the limits of your imagination. Wisdom comes forth, never ending not unlike the horn of cornucopia. Wisdom is the open mind and understanding that reality is not dictated by the limits of you imagination.

Wisdom is merely fodder feeding your imagination, imagine it and it will eventually become part of daily technology!

[eccentrically1]

Yes, the universe's idea, let's allow our imagination to wander.

There is no body in the universe with a constant velocity, every object in the universe is accelerating in a universal frame of reference. If gravity from objects in the universe interact with every other body in the universe, the implication is that every body must be in a state of acceleration; curving towards some other body - a star, a black hole, another solar system, another galaxy, etc. That's the simplest description of why gravity is a fictitious force. You can always choose a perspective where your frame of reference is orbiting and thus accelerating. You don't even have to believe that mass distorts the spacetime around it - only that straight line motion on any scale is an illusion.

The modern theory of dark energy came about because the measurements of the galaxies receding from us didn't match with predictions for accelerations when all the variables were accounted. They are accelerating from us faster than they should be.

I don't mean to sound like I'm knocking down everyone's ideas. But if the ideas that aren't going to work are debated towards some sort of conclusion, then we can try something else that might work.

That's what we're here for isn't it?

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi E1,

you wrote,

Fictitious forces are also called reactive, so the active force is the universe's opposing force to the inertia.
This fact, that I don't have to prove do I, assures that the only means to rotate an inert wheel made of wood or plastic or whatever, is by external means. Unless Bessler was rotating his wheels - overbalancing their weights - with some kind of internal fuel, then it had to have come from an external source. The universe demands this relationship, not cloud, or me, or Bill or whoever.

Orbiting Mass, I can see no time in the orbiting path when gravity stops acting (doing work) on the path of the orbiting mass, although it is more a spiral path as everything moves forward, and past work done was just that, work done to get thus far. Energy = the capacity to do work, could that mean the application of force doing work has the capacity to do work you would think so.

I thought we was in agreement on the coat hanger and battery experiment, that the work done by the pull of the hand (energy input) was lost to the effects of CF, and to repeat this experiment would require more energy input (energy conversion) to change the battery's Orbital paths again.

According to most people here there is no added energy input required for all the work done against all the opposing forces acting on orbiting mass, thus meaning opposing forces have no effect on the mass's original inertia billions of years ago, this is maybe why they are called fictitious forces because they have done no work in billions of years according to Know Physics. Doing work requires the use of energy just about every experiment show this, you cannot get something for nothing as we keep getting reminded, and in the next breath we are told yes you can, orbiting mass take zero energy input to maintain orbiting mass's, you guys need to get your act together, before you start preaching one thing then saying the opposite.

I personally do not agree that orbiting mass require zero energy inputs to sustain billions of years of orbiting paths. Its not because I have a lack of understanding, its is because I have yet to see experimental evidence that are beyond question.

As for the greater Universe picture, we can still only speculate (best guess) given the very,very small window of opportunity we have had to observe it.

[eccentrically1]

You're right about one thing, gravity never stops acting on mass, but, the work that gravity does on orbiting mass is the best evidence that gravity is conservative, i.e., it doesn't change anything over time. Gravity works to keep masses in an equilibrium. When masses reach apogee of their orbits, it works to draw them back together. When masses reach perigee, the acceleration they obtained from their apogee allow them to swing back out to their apogee.

So orbiting masses are like big pendulums swinging around in a vacuum, connected by, let's say, an invisible, lossless bungee cord. They can swing back and forth in perpetuity because there aren't any external losses. The losses observed in Earth's motion are mostly tidal losses (internal) generated from the bulge the moon creates in the oceans.

In a pendulum you swing, there are external losses from atmospheric drag, and internal losses at the pivot, so it never swings back up to apogee, unless you keep pushing it. If gravity was providing energy to the orbit of your pendulum, you wouldn't have to keep pushing it, and it would swing forever.

That coat hanger and battery experiment was to show conservation of angular momentum. It really confused a lot of guys. In the end, it showed the formula/law was correct, and a lot of energy was expended at our keyboards.

Does that make more sense now?