I can now see why the differentiated inertia wheel will work.
The the two conservation laws, momentum and energy, are simply the same law at different levels.
Using a multi-storey building as an analogy the we see the conservation of momentum when we are on the same floor, the 10th say, as the action taking place. It is a conservation between batches. When the action takes place on the 9th floor we see it as a conservation of energy because we have not changed our viewpoint. If we move to the 9th floor and thus change our viewpoint to within batches then we see that the conservation of energy is simply a conservation of momentum within batches.
The floor below that, the 8th floor, is the jerk floor. If we move to it we will see the within component variance as momentum which is conserved. However, seen from the 10th floor it is the conservation of Jerk. Jerk has to be conserved because it is only the momentum lamb in wolf's clothing.
I could kick myself for not having seen this earlier.
But there you are. Cognitive dissonance affects me just as much as anybody.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
a dull stupid fatuous person
yank: pull, or move with a sudden movement; "He turned the handle and jerked the door open"
an abrupt spasmodic movement
move with abrupt, seemingly uncontrolled motions; "The patient's legs were jerkings"
(mechanics) the rate of change of acceleration
twitch: make an uncontrolled, short, jerky motion; "his face is twitching"
jerky: meat (especially beef) cut in strips and dried in the sun
buck: jump vertically, with legs stiff and back arched; "the yung filly bucked"
raising a weight from shoulder height to above the head by straightening the arms
throw or toss with a quick motion; "flick a piece of paper across the table"; "jerk his head"
tug: a sudden abrupt pull
Frank, you a moron, without a doubt, I'm sure you have spent your whole life wondering why you can't advance your opinions further than your own self deluded mind. Its because your not half as smart as you think you are and even less adept at interpersonal communication. Your actions and the way you behave are no more complicated than any first year physcology student could figure out, and that fact that you can not self diagnose your own largest shortcoming is hilarious. I don't think you have any idea of the basics of even the simplest motions involved with a working concept. Anagrams and uncreative regurgitated word shuffling without reason is like looking at a child that feels inferior create his own language because he knows he has no clue what is really going on. A quick search of your behaviour shows your a forum jumper that follows the same MO whereever you go. Your an idiot that finds amusement in frustating other people and acting superior behind the facade of the WEB. Its obvious to me that you are just as pathetic in person and you have seen the back of m any heads walking away from you throughtout your life. Unfortunately you never got a clue. As i finish this post i will be ading you to my ignore list as your self deluded idiocy has reached a point that has become unbearable.
Bye Frank
Dave
Si mobile in circumferentia circuli feratur ea celeritate, quam acquirit cadendo ex
altitudine, quae sit quartae parti diameter aequalis ; habebit vim centrifugam suae
gravitati aequalem.
Straight one Dave. As I looked back on that last thread I started having deja ve, I have little doubt the near same conversation happened with Frank years ago. The only thing I might add Dave is there is a possibility the only way Frank can get a bonner is by trolling, and/or ( because this last part is assured ) he endlessly tries to get others to worship his ego and his delusion of grandeur makes him blind to the moronic paths he's creating in his process.
I'll be taking your good advice and will be ignoring him as well. Given the subject matter for anyone else who want to watch good slight of hand for a change. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... qI-dBQRa0Q
meChANical Man.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
With reference to the above diagram which has already been posted in another thread you can see that for Jerk to be conserved (as it must) then one has to add a clockwise acceleration to reduce the high acceleration of the low inertia wheel and increase the low acceleration of the high inertia wheel. This balancing jerk constitutes the useful output from the Keenie wheel in the slightly modified and more explicit form which I have proposed.
Attachments
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
Interesting insight Frank. I have no idea why FWG2 and M have displayed this knee-jerk reaction of bad manners and unseasonable ill will. Conservation of Jerks or at least Jerk-like behavior seems inevitable in forums such as these. Merry Christmas, you bastards! :)
The search for free energy requires a rigorous review of ALL aspects of the basic axioms of physics. Very probably, we have been blinded by science and have missed something basic at a very rudimentary level. I appreciate that somebody such as Frank, with his advanced academic training and a pedigree within the established physics & government community, has the balls to challenge the whole system at the roots of the tree.
General relativity is at the heart of our conservative physics models. Momentum and Energy are just different ways of assigning numbers to mass in motion. But have we correctly defined both Mass and Motion? If velocity is relative to an arbitrarily chosen inertial reference frame, then the Energy of a moving mass is also NOT a fixed quantity, but is also relative.
Any chosen constant velocity is effectively the same as zero velocity - it just depends on your frame of reference. But Acceleration is much more interesting - it can't be zeroed out by chosing a different inertial frame. But we live in a very complex real world ... the universe is pulsating with cycles and frequencies and interactions between those cycles/frequencies. Why should we presume that anything really has a constant velocity, or even constant acceleration? We need to look deeper, at the Acceleration of Acceleration, or the Acceleration of the Acceleration of Acceleration ... etc.
Jerk, Jounce, Snap, Crackle, Pop ... anyone interested in Bessler should really know about these terms and include them in their thinking. This is basically mainstream science - don't blame Frank for this ... and don't show your ignorance by becoming a jerk ...
Greendoor, Sorry you feel that way, I am just one of those guys that hates bullies, I feel sorry for them and usually ignore them. I have tried and have held my tongue for a long time. But i have been disgusted with the way that frank presents himself and continually softballs insults at anyone who tires to wade through his Jibberish. I have held my tongue and waited until frank had his own thread , I held my tongue long enough and even though i hate to act the way i did in the last post i am the type of person who will stand up and say when something is wrong. Even when that may not be the most popular thing to do. I believe in the type of person that i am and feel that my disdain for the way frank acts says more about the true character of the type of person that i am than my outburst.
Frank may, big may, have something to say, but unfortunately here and i'm sure most other places in his life he has absolutely no understanding of how to do it. I have terminated many people like frank in my life. And i'm often presented with the argument that "they may have been valuable" but i have always felt that the dynamic of the groups moral was always more important than the self indulgent ignorance of any one person. I could care less if I have insulted frank, i am sure that my opinion of him has absolutely no impact on him in any way, if it could have he would not be who he is. If you or anyone else wants to play slapstick with him your welcome to.
I took my time, and i've decided he's an idiot. If i'm wrong well then i'll be the one with mud on my face. But i don't think i will. At least i won't have to cringe everytime he makes his snide little remarks anymore. Let me know when he figures out the next "new" theory of how it all works.
Happy Holidays
Crazy Dave
Si mobile in circumferentia circuli feratur ea celeritate, quam acquirit cadendo ex
altitudine, quae sit quartae parti diameter aequalis ; habebit vim centrifugam suae
gravitati aequalem.
Needless to say I've met "terminators" like FWG before in my career.
The most egregious example was Dr Blackman. Below is an account of
our high noon moment which I have managed to dig up from my files.
>> I must admit - I'm more than a bit suspicious of consultants like
>> Frost and Sullivan, too. Pilkington Brothers got no less than four
>> sets of consultants to approve their launch of Glass-Reinforced
>> Cement. I said PB were mad and that GRC would fail when the strain
>> capacity ran out at 5 years. Somewhat to my surprise and enormous
>> schadenfreude GRC failed right on time.
> I'm curious about the failure of the GRC Frank. Why did it fail?
> and how did you estimate the time before failure?
It failed because it lost all its ductility by the end of 5 years
and became as brittle as the unreinforced cement matrix.
We knew the time to failure because we had done tests of 5 years
duration and more. Basically the alkaline cement attacks the glass
The chemists at BRS had developed a zirconium glass which was 10 times
as resistant to attack as the traditional E glass used for plastics.
But E glass GRC becomes brittle within 6 months.
Why did the manufacturers go ahead when they knew the
material would become brittle? - You just try and persuade
a GLASS manufacturer that brittleness is not a good idea.
Why didn't the BRS chemists abort? Well it was their baby
and what do chemists know about the dangers of brittleness?
Eventually it was the wetting and drying differential
shrinkage which did the business. 8-)
But you yanks know all about the danger of brittleness, eh!
It's not for nothing NASA is known as "Need Another Seven
Astronauts".
As for the consultants, four lots were hired to tell them
what they wanted to hear cos I refused the imprimatur of
the BRS Structural Engineering Division -
At a crisis meeting held on neutral territory half way between
BRS and PB, the PB chairman screamed at me "I'll hound you Grimer
- I'll hound you, I'll hound you..." when I wouldn't buckle - and
then promptly broke down in tears. My Deputy Director, Cornelius
said "I can't have you speaking to my staff like that Dr.B" and
Dr.Evans suggested we adjourned. Apparently Dr.B asked our head
chemist if I was a communist (I was wearing an astrakhan hat that
winter). Gutt said, "On the contrary - he hates communism - he's
a catholic."
A new committee was formed a month later and much to my relief
I was not invited. <g>
And so you can well understand my feelings of schadenfreude when
5 years later it all went up the Swannee.
Fortunately PB were never allowed to make any structural members
because years earlier I has spoken out of turn at a visit of the
Director General of all the government environmental research labs
and told him that we were in for a repeat of the high alumina cement
debacle with GRC. Lyons wanted to close the whole thing down but
was persuaded to allow non-structural members such as claddings.
Frank
I don't claim I did anything particularly brave. I had tenure and
couldn't be "terminated" - unlike the NASA engineers who didn't
dig their heels in over the brittle nature of the rocket seals.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
