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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: re: energy producing experiments  (Read 138175 times)

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #195 on: April 01, 2020, 05:14:13 PM »
I took a video of a 2.5 kilogram cart wheel that can be stopped by two 152 gram spheres. I tried to post it on line but YouTube said the app was temporarily closed.

This cart wheel would be the same basic experiment as the cylinder and spheres (see Delburt Phend; you tube). The mass ration is about 9 to 1. This means that when the spheres have all the motion they have nine times as much energy.  ½ *.305 kg * 9 m/sec  * 9 m/sec = 12.35 joules; ½ * 2.745 kg *1 m/sec * 1 m/sec = 1.37 joules:   momentum is conserved; .305 * 9 roughly equals 2.8 *1

The wheel is roughly the same shape as the gyroscope. And the interesting thing is that the energy transfer to the spheres only takes about one third rotation. Experiments have shown that the stop occurs in the same quantity of rotation no matter what the rate of rotation. The quantity of friction in one third rotation must be very small. So you have a huge quantity of energy produced with very little friction and in very little time.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #196 on: July 11, 2020, 03:30:45 PM »
There should be a very simple experiment on the internet: but I could not find it. He experiment would be a puck, on a frictionless plane, rotating on the end of a string; and then the string comes in contact with an immovable pin. The puck then begins rotating about the immovable pin. Lets say the string length is originally 50 cm; and then after it begin rotating about the pin it has a 10 cm string length. So we have a puck rotating at 50 cm and then at 10 cm.

When we burn through a string that is rotating a puck; the puck will move in a straight line with the same speed as it was moving around the arc of the circle. Therefore we also know that the speed around the smaller 10 cm circle will be the same as the speed of the puck in the 50 cm circle.

Just to get real numbers lets say that the puck has a mass of 80 grams and the speed is 3 m/sec.

So in the large circle the energy is: ½ .080 kg * 3m/sec * 3/sec =  .36 joules

In the 10 cm circle the energy is: ½ .080 kg * 3m/sec * 3/sec =  .36 joules

The linear momentum in both circles is: .080 kg * 3 m/sec =  .24

But what about angular momentum conservation?  The angular momentum is L = R * linear momentum.

The angular momentum of the .5 meter circle is: .5 m * .24 = .12

The angular momentum of the .1 meter circle is: .024

So the angular momentum of the system is not conserved.

Shouldn't you be skeptical of all those high school teachers and college professors that told you something that is false.

Angular momentum is not a conserved quantity. Some lecturers will actually tell you that linear momentum changes so that angular momentum can be conserved. These are the people that never back up their conjectures with experiments.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #197 on: August 04, 2020, 03:11:29 AM »

The experimenter cuts the string and the momentum is then equal to the linear momentum (velocity * mass) that the puck had while traveling around the arc of the circle.

It doesn't make any difference what length of string the experimenter used, he could have used any length that fits the table.  That would of course be an infinite number of lengths for R; the radius. This infinite number of Rs would give you an infinite number of angular momentums: because angular momentum is linear momentum times R.

Further: the experimenter could reattach the puck to a different length of string. That would give you the same linear momentum on a different length of string. That would give you a different angular momentum. Obviously angular momentum is not a conserved quantity.

So what else did all those high school teachers and professors tell you that was false.

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1842
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #198 on: August 04, 2020, 02:27:44 PM »
You might want to read that:

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-physics/chapter/conservation-of-angular-momentum/

Give yourself the time to understand. Your high school teacher was not such a bad guy.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #199 on: August 04, 2020, 04:03:55 PM »
They use the ice skater because there are no real experiments that prove that angular momentum is conserved. There is no way to quantitatively evaluate (at least not in high school, or at most universities) the mass of an ice skater or someone seated on a spinning chair.

Use a pincher to hold the string instead of a scissor, and the puck will proceed with the same arc motion in a smaller circle. Angular momentum is not conserved: but it is used to cover for their other false concepts.

Linear momentum is conserved in rotation. Not all lines are straight.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #200 on: August 08, 2020, 03:42:46 AM »
Now here is a very good one.

I do not know if he would have announced results that would debunk the accepted theory; but he does go to extremes to get the results he wants. He yanks on the string; faster and faster; until he gets the results he wants. Is it possible that yanking on the string adds linear velocity to the ball?

Indeed; does he not say that the linear velocity doubled. He yanks on the string fast enough to increase the linear velocity (tangent velocity) enough to double the original linear velocity.  Now how do you increase velocity? How do you increase linear velocity except with the application of outside force?  He has added outside force.

He yanks on the string fast enough so that the force in the string is no longer at 90° to the original direction of the motion. It is no longer a balanced force but imbalanced.  Thus: he increases the linear velocity of the ball.

If he were willing to accept the correct answer for the experiment he would have conducted the experiment as gently as possible; to make sure that he was not adding external force.

Rather than force the wanted answer: why doesn’t he rotate a puck on the end of a string on a frictionless plane? And then interrupt the string with a pin somewhere along its length. The puck would continue with the same tangent velocity but in a smaller circle.

This is an important experiment because it proves that in order to conserve angular momentum you must violate the law of conservation of linear momentum.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #201 on: August 10, 2020, 08:33:15 PM »
Also check the kinetic energy increase in this experiment. Does it quadruple? Why is that not a problem?

And then this formula L = mvr is used to predict that the thrown mass; in the Dawn Mission despin event, is moving very slow.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #202 on: August 12, 2020, 03:22:03 AM »
Does the linear velocity remain constant in this experiment, by Paul Nord?

I could not find an address: but look under;  circular motion paul nord

It is an unwinding puck on the end of a string.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #203 on: August 13, 2020, 03:51:41 AM »
Lets review the other hoax formula; The Conservation of Energy.

In a ballistic pendulum there is a small amount of motion lost to heat, but the loss is so small that the linear momentum conservation formula hardly notices the change. In the very same ballistic pendulum experiment this same loss of heat almost makes the kinetic energy disappear. In truth: this massive amount of heat, to explain the loss of energy, is made up. It is just an excuse to pretend that the Law of Conservation of Energy is true.

If the heat was lost then the motion could not come back; but the double despin experiment shows that the motion does come back.

AWHS davjohn41 ballistic pendulum you tube     This is another experiment with actual data: note 4:10 minutes in. The teacher forgot to tell them the accepted excuse.    Styrofoam is not a heat sink.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #204 on: August 15, 2020, 03:00:43 AM »
This is copied from Wikipedia: we are given a set of information and then a false statement. And we are missing one needed piece of information; which is the, rotational mass, diameter of the satellite.

Wiki:  “As an example of yo-yo de-spin, on the Dawn Mission, roughly 3 kg of weights, and 12 meter cables, reduce the initial spin rate of 1420 kg of spacecraft from 36 RPM down to 3 RPM in the other direction[1]. The relatively small weights can have such a large effect since they are far from the axis of the spin, and their effect grows as the square of the length of the cables. “

From the picture; the satellite has some equipment extending to give it the 1.7m diameter, but I think its rotation mass radius is more like .4 meters. The twelve meters of extended cable is also a radius.

This gives you an initial rotational velocity of .4 m * 2 = .8 meter diameter * pi * 36 rpm / 60 sec = 1.50 meters per second.  So the faulty formula gives you:  1420 kg * 1.5 m/sec *.4 m = 852 units of angular momentum; which is all given to 3 kilogram (I think it was actually 2.6 kg).

So according to the faulty angular momentum conservation formula the new velocity for the released masses  is only; 852 = 3kg * V * 12 m =  23.66 m/sec.    54 miles per hour       A catcher's mitt can handle 100 mph

So why not let this 72 units of momentum (3 kg * 24 m/sec) re-wrap around the satellite; ballistic experiments prove that it could only give the satellite a rotational velocity of (72 = about 1420 kg * v) = about .0507  meters per second.

This .0507 m/sec is below the 3 rpm that they did get; and the masses were released.

For linear velocity to be conserved the 3 kilograms would have to be moving around 700 m/sec. This 700 m/sec is dangerous; and that is why they are released.

The double despin experiment proves that the satellite could be returned to the original rate of rotation by the rewinding masses, 24 m/sec won't restore the spin.

Yes I know: I have said this before; but it is worth 7 trillion dollars.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #205 on: August 20, 2020, 03:14:24 AM »
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=TMu2hSEA&id=6BB16497F82989ED2B478664F434FFEA6B0CE030&thid=OIP.TMu2hSEAPL8m07F-jJA8ggHaFl&mediaurl=https%3A%

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=pendulum+with+peg&qpvt=pendulum+with+peg&view=detail&mid=4A152BF53AB0A335A03A4A152BF53AB0A335A03A&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dpendulum%2Bwith%2Bpeg%26qpvt%3Dpendulum%2Bwith%2Bpeg%26FORM%3DVDRE

I don't know where the short names when but here are a few, of what some refer to as Galileo's pendulum.

The energy and therefore speed at the down swing position is the same on both sides; as the upward swing starts. That also means that the magnitude of linear momentum is the same. But what happened to angular momentum conservation.  L = mvr

Angular momentum is not conserved because the length, or radius, does not remain the same.

Kinetic energy is not a conserved quantity; so what is the only Law that explains the restoration of spin in the despin.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #206 on: September 01, 2020, 01:50:58 AM »
Pasco has a few experiments where they claim angular momentum is conserved. They do this by not changing the radius. The problem is that to get angular momentum you have to multiply linear momentum by the radius. They drop a disk on top of another disk; of the same dimension (Radius).

When you have a before and after experiment where the before and after radius are the same; then you are merely stating that linear momentum has remained the same. You have not searched out whether or not you can change the radius.

In the interrupted pendulum; also known as Galileo's pendulum, the radius is changed.  And angular momentum does not remain the same as the pendulum swings through the down swing position. This experiment is used to prove that energy is a conserved property. Conservation of energy should not be a surprise because nothing (mass and velocity) has change.

Change the mass, as in a ballistic pendulum, and the conservation of energy drops out; with a totally make-believe quantity of heat. The double despin proves that the motion is still there; it has not been lost as heat.

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3948
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #207 on: September 01, 2020, 01:10:18 PM »

The wheel is roughly the same shape as the gyroscope. And the interesting thing is that the energy transfer to the spheres only takes about one third rotation. Experiments have shown that the stop occurs in the same quantity of rotation no matter what the rate of rotation. The quantity of friction in one third rotation must be very small. So you have a huge quantity of energy produced with very little friction and in very little time.

Ok so, to understand this i want you to consider the energy transfer along the string:

From our perspective we can view this as a ‘wave’, which has an amplitude and velocity
It’s frequency, however, is pre-determined by our analysis.
It is a wave, traversing a string, therefore we know it has a wavelength equal to the free motion of the string. At 1/3 we find the node of maximum change in amplitude, and thus maximum transfer of rotational momentum.

Tension plays a major role in the scalar equation here
This is derived from the force between the two masses which approaches its’ peak at the same node
and subpeaks at subsequent nodes. (as does the remainder of momentum transfer; remember that an object that ‘stops’ and changes direction from our perspective doesn’t necessarily have a 0-momentum and to know the true value we would first have to determine our own)

We dont need to apply relativity here, most of that is semantical for our application.
We can now apply a peg at the 1/3 node, such that as the cylinder rotates and the smaller masses apply tension to the string, at 1/3 rotation and at 1/3 the length: the string hits the peg.
Then we can observe the momentum change directions in almost a pure fashion

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #208 on: September 02, 2020, 12:29:01 AM »
A disk with a 1.278 meter diameter and a thickness (height) of one decimeter can have a mass of one thousand kilograms.

To throw this disk up 30 meters will require a velocity of 24.26 m/sec. From d = ½ v²/a

This would be 24.26 m/sec * 1000 kg = 24,260 units of linear Newtonian momentum.

A stack of these disks that is 30 meters high would have a mass of 300,000 kilograms.

When this 300,000 kg stack is dropped 5 cm it will have a velocity of .9904 m/sec. This is 297,136 units of linear Newtonian momentum. You only need 24,261 units of the 297,136 units to reconfigure the stack, and the stack has only dropped half of the available distance.

So here is the procedure; you let the entire stack drop 5 cm. You transfer 24,261 units of momentum to the lower disk, you throw the disk back up to the top and the stack is ready to be dropped again.

The remaining 272,859 units of momentum and the remaining drop of 5 cm can be used to spin electric generators.

The 24.261 m/sec velocity of the one thousand kilograms can be achieved by use of the despin event.

#### Delburt Phend

• Full Member
• Posts: 223
##### Re: re: energy producing experiments
« Reply #209 on: November 15, 2020, 02:50:49 AM »
John Mandlbaur; successfully argues that angular momentum conservation does not work in lab. You may find it interesting. john@baur-research.com