Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Big try at gravity wheel  (Read 658134 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #315 on: January 15, 2014, 08:55:56 AM »
You can stick your bullet points where the sun don't shine.




I asked a question. Answer it.
Grimer, please calm yourself. 

I thought I answered your question.  I'll answer in more detail:

Referring to your figure, you have two NG vectors and two EG vectors.  The acceleration due to gravity is normal to the EG vectors.  E = integral(F*ds).  Where F is orthogonal to ds as it is here, F*ds = 0.  Therefore, there is zero gravitational energy associated with the EG vectors in your sketch.  You seem to acknowledge that the NG vectors have the same magnitude.  If we agree about that then the PEs are the same which is bullet point 3).  If you don't agree, then please explain why.

(This is my first try linking an image here. I hope it works correctly.)
http://www.overunity.com/13480/big-try-at-gravity-wheel/dlattach/attach/132106/image//

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #316 on: January 15, 2014, 08:58:51 AM »
some will think different
Marsing why wouldn't any reasonable person want abundant and cheap energy?

Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #317 on: January 15, 2014, 09:03:20 AM »
I haven't the slightest interest in what you think.


We are here to discuss my ideas not yours.


I repeat. Answer the question. Don't keep trying to change the subject. If you never studied elementary dynamics say so.


Edit: Now I've got to take the kids to school. So you've plenty of time to unscramble your brain, Mark.  ;)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #318 on: January 15, 2014, 09:10:04 AM »
I haven't the slightest interest in what you think.


We are here to discuss my ideas not yours.


I repeat. Answer the question. Don't keep trying to change the subject. If you never studied elementary dynamics say so.

Grimer, the only question that you have posted in the past few hours is this one, which I have already answered twice:

The amount of gravitational energy in the drop is the same. It's the amount of Ersatz that's different. The dancer is doing more work pulling her arms in.


CAN'T YOU SEE THAT!!!!
For the third time:  There is no gravitational energy associated with the EG vectors because the acceleration due to gravity is normal to those vectors. 

There is no "dancer" or "arms" in your diagram.  There are two pendula.  If you feel differently, then kindly explain why.

http://www.overunity.com/13480/big-try-at-gravity-wheel/dlattach/attach/132106/image//

Offline Marsing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #319 on: January 15, 2014, 09:36:18 AM »
Marsing why wouldn't any reasonable person want abundant and cheap energy?

you will find an answers by answering my question

Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #320 on: January 15, 2014, 11:53:22 AM »
Grimer, the only question that you have posted in the past few hours is this one, which I have already answered twice:
For the third time:  There is no gravitational energy associated with the EG vectors because the acceleration due to gravity is normal to those vectors. 

There is no "dancer" or "arms" in your diagram.  There are two pendula.  If you feel differently, then kindly explain why.

http://www.overunity.com/13480/big-try-at-gravity-wheel/dlattach/attach/132106/image//


I didn't say there was Newtonian Gravitational energy. It's Ersatz gravitational energy. If you don't know what Ersatz gravitational energy is then you've never watched Star Trek. How do you think Spock keeps his feet on the floor.


The tension in the tie between the bob and the pivot can be resolved vertically and horizontally. The horizontal component is analogous to a ballet dancer pulling a weight towards her body. She does work. She puts energy into the system.


The horizontal resolved force of the tie is doing work.


The horizontal force to the right is balanced by an equal and opposite horizontal force at the pivot.


I'll stop there to make sure you're following me.


And no more irrelevant stuff. If that stuff was any us the gravity problem would have been solved years ago. It's rubbish.


And the reason I'm being rude and not calming down is because I've got to rattle your brain until all the cognitive dissonance is shaken out of it.


If you don't know what cognitive dissonance is - Google it.

P.S. I'm going for my lunch. In the meantime read my stuff from p.15 onwards and get those little grey cells working hard on understanding it.



Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #321 on: January 15, 2014, 12:41:55 PM »
Grimer, mechanical energy has a well accepted definition and that is:  E=integral(F*ds).  You have not specified any other source of acceleration or apparent force other than that of gravity accelerating parallel to the NG vectors and normal to the EG vectors.  As you have set the scenario up, the only source of work in this system is the gravitational field, and it cannot do any work in the normal, IE horizontal, plane.

A spinning ballet dancer has angular momentum and radial acceleration in the horizontal plane.  The pendula do not.  If you are alleging a source of acceleration along the EG vector, kindly state that source of acceleration.  Tension does not equal acceleration.  The Sword of Damacles doesn't go anywhere as long as the thread holds.

If you need to introduce some additional constraints to your set-up, then by all means do that.  Going off topic to science fiction TV does not add insight.

It would be great if you have insights into some set of conditions where gravity is non-conservative.  It would be an incredible breakthrough.  I am still waiting to learn of such conditions from you.





Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #322 on: January 15, 2014, 03:38:54 PM »
Oh dear.


I was using the dancer as an analogy. You've pressed it too far.


I'm using science fiction to jump your ideas out of the grooves they are running in. To try and get you to use you imagination for once. To think outside the box, Dr Bono's lateral thinking.


Didn't you ever play Cowboys and Indians as a child - on your own - running around with an imaginary gun in your hand shooting imaginary Indians?


You need to exercise that kind of imagination here. Its like trying to see a joke.


Do you have mild autism, Asperges syndrome? Do you have difficulty seeing jokes? People who have a detailed knowledge of a subject like you have of electronics are often mildly autistic. If you are I'm wasting my time because you are never going to "see" it. If so tell me now.

[/font][/size]
Have you ever watched Star Trek. Do you love it or do you think it's childish and boring.[/font][/size]

[/font][/size]
Are you capable of becoming a child again? Because you need to if you are to enter the kingdom of gravitational energy.[/font][/size]






Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #323 on: January 15, 2014, 04:01:10 PM »
This is an extract from one of the files on my website. As you will see, my [/pre]boss had the same problem as you. Lack of imagination. Lack of lateral thinking.[/pre]Lack of an ability to turn a problem inside out.[/pre]==============================================================================[/pre]
[/pre]There was an interesting incident occurred whilst we were making density measurements, an incident which illustrates two aspects of research which were later to become very important, the possibility of conceptual inversion and the psychological difficulty such inversion inculcated. To find the density of a piece of material one needs to measure two quantities. The weight of the material – straightforward enough, just stick it on a balance – and the volume of a material. Finding the volume of a material is easy enough when the material is a nice simple shape like a cube or a cylinder; you just make measurements and use the appropriate mathematical formula. When the material is irregular, like a roughly hacked piece of soil cement or a king’s crown then there’s more of a problem as Archimedes realised. The solution which came to him in his bath and led to him shouting Eureka and running through the streets naked (allegedly) has never been improved upon and it is his method, more specifically its inverse, which we used to find the volume of our soil-cement pieces. Nowadays Archimedes’ discovery is normally expressed in the form, “The loss of weight in water is equal to the volume of water displaced.” Strictly speaking, the loss of weight in water is equal to the weight of water displaced but since 1 cc  of water weighs one gram more or less, one of the more useful features about the metric system, we can jump directly from loss of weight to volume. Using this principle then the volume of a lump of stuff can be measured by hanging it by a thin thread from one arm of a lever balance to measure its weight and then letting out the thread until it is immersed in a beaker of water when its weight is again measured. The original weight is its weight. The loss in weight is its volume. So the original weight divided by the loss in weight is its density. The Concrete Division were using just such a system for measuring the density gradients of core slices cut from concrete roads. Because we didn’t have a suitable lever balance we thought we would be clever and do it slightly differently. Using a pan balance we measure not the loss in the weight of the specimen but the gain in the weight of the water when we hung a specimen in the water. On day our Division Head was walking through the lab and he happened to see me holding one end of the piece of cotton and calling out the scale readings to my colleague. He stood and watched for a while looking puzzled. “What are you doing Grimer?” “I’m measuring the volume of these soil-cement slices, sir.” “But the volume is equal to the loss in weight of the specimen. You are holding the end of the string. How can you measure the loss in weight like that.” “I’m not measuring the loss in weight of the specimen, sir. I’m measuring the gain in weight of the water.” “Are you sure you can do that, Grimer?” His incredulity was so palpable that I almost started having doubts myself. It was like when your wife asks you for the third time if you turned the gas off when you left. “Pretty sure. After all, the weight has to go somewhere, doesn’t it! It can’t just disappear.” He walked slowly away looking very unconvinced. In retrospect I can’t really blame him. When all your life you have been used to seeing a thing done one way, its very difficult to accept that it can also be done in completely the opposite way. Standing there holding one end of a thread  with the specimen dangling in a beaker of water at the other it must have seemed as though I was engaged in some mystic rite of pendulum divination. [/pre]============================================================================[/pre]Now go to my website and read the rest of the "Stuff" file.[/pre]
[/pre]Sorry about the lack of paras. the programme has destroyed my tags. Put in your own[/pre]Alternatively go to my website and read the extract in context.[/pre] [/pre]

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #324 on: January 15, 2014, 05:05:04 PM »
Oh dear.


I was using the dancer as an analogy. You've pressed it too far.


I'm using science fiction to jump your ideas out of the grooves they are running in. To try and get you to use you imagination for once. To think outside the box, Dr Bono's lateral thinking.


Didn't you ever play Cowboys and Indians as a child - on your own - running around with an imaginary gun in your hand shooting imaginary Indians?


You need to exercise that kind of imagination here. Its like trying to see a joke.


Do you have mild autism, Asperges syndrome? Do you have difficulty seeing jokes? People who have a detailed knowledge of a subject like you have of electronics are often mildly autistic. If you are I'm wasting my time because you are never going to "see" it. If so tell me now.

[/font][/size]
Have you ever watched Star Trek. Do you love it or do you think it's childish and boring.[/font][/size]

[/font][/size]
Are you capable of becoming a child again? Because you need to if you are to enter the kingdom of gravitational energy.[/font][/size]
Grimer, we don't need to go off topic with science fiction, childhood games, or analogies that require elements that are completely unevidenced in the case under discussion.  Again, I ask you to remain on topic. 

Do all the lateral thinking that you like.  Really, I encourage you to: ponder, imagine, play, think as non-linearly as you like.  Look for inspiration wherever you can find it.  Perhaps someday you will find inspiration that allows you to form insights that you have so far failed to supply.  Imagination is wonderful for conceiving ideas.  Rigorous analysis and / or experiments are how researchers test ideas.

We have your idea.  It is that gravity is not always conservative.  What we don't have is any expression of limiting conditions that would allow that against the myriad of conditions where gravity has been shown to behave conservatively.  I am interested in whether evidence that supports your idea can be developed or not.  If you cannot or simply do not identify some limiting conditions, then we are stuck with all the existing evidence that gravity is conservative and none for your idea.  At that point, your idea just fails.  No entertainment preferences can address that impasse.

If you ever do find insights that allow you to define a set of limitations under which you believe a gravitational field acts in a non-conservative way, then please share those insights and I will be happy to assist in developing tests for those ideas. 

Offline Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #325 on: January 15, 2014, 05:21:22 PM »
This is an extract from one of the files on my website. As you will see, my [/pre]boss had the same problem as you. Lack of imagination. Lack of lateral thinking.[/pre]Lack of an ability to turn a problem inside out.[/pre]==============================================================================[/pre]
...
Now go to my website and read the rest of the "Stuff" file.[/pre]
...........................................................................................

Mon ami, a web address will help.

Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #326 on: January 15, 2014, 06:10:27 PM »
Mon ami, a web address will help.



http://www.zen111904.zen.co.uk/


It's on my forum profile but since to get at it I have to click on the modify profile it's possible that only I can get at it.


Frankly, this website is the pits.


Mark seems to have given up (thank god).


I'll carry on the instruction with you if you like. From your posts so far you seem to have what it takes. I was impressed by your RAR diagrams.


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #327 on: January 15, 2014, 06:14:30 PM »
This is an extract from one of the files on my website. As you will see, my [/pre]boss had the same problem as you. Lack of imagination. Lack of lateral thinking.[/pre]Lack of an ability to turn a problem inside out.[/pre]==============================================================================[/pre]
[/pre]There was an interesting incident occurred whilst we were making density measurements, ...
If a measurement or evaluation method is valid then it should be both verifiable, and comprehensible to people with reasonable skill in the relevant art. 

Archimedes' Principle is very basic.  The method you used was well known when I learned it many years ago.  Did you explain to your division manager that had you let the sample sink you would have gotten its weight, but by holding it submerged but by keeping it above the bottom of the vessel you got the weight of the displaced water and therefore the volume of the sample?  If you did it suggests that the division manager was either having a bad day or was due to refresh his basic physics.



Offline Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #328 on: January 16, 2014, 06:41:03 AM »
.......................................................
.....................
Mark seems to have given up (thank god).
I'll carry on the instruction with you if you like. From your posts so far you seem to have what it takes. I was impressed by your RAR diagrams.

Mon Cher Grimer,
I don't think so, that Mark has given up.
Even if he did, you are hooked. and that shouldn't be an excuse for you to run to the back door.

He asked a basic simple question and is entitled to a basic simple answer

Careful, I am pitching the ball, ......stretch your arms out to grab...

PS: No, you can not have,  can be a valid answer!

Greetings, Yellow_Sunrise

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #329 on: January 16, 2014, 10:35:20 AM »
Mon Cher Grimer,
I don't think so, that Mark has given up.
Even if he did, you are hooked. and that shouldn't be an excuse for you to run to the back door.

He asked a basic simple question and is entitled to a basic simple answer

Careful, I am pitching the ball, ......stretch your arms out to grab...

PS: No, you can not have,  can be a valid answer!

Greetings, Yellow_Sunrise
Red_Sunset, thank you.
The conversation such as it was is presently at an impasse.  I don't think I have anything constructive I can add at this time.  If Grimer wishes to think of that as me giving up, that does not bother me.