Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Antigravity => Other antigravity machines and devices => Topic started by: currenthopper on December 24, 2008, 07:38:08 PM

Title: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on December 24, 2008, 07:38:08 PM
Am I to understand that there is currently no working model of a inertia drive. What I mean is there is no model that when activated shows any kind of decrease in weight, when placed on a scale. And when suspended by a rope it shows no signs of pulling one way or the other from top dead center. And when placed in a large still body of water it propels itself along. I say large body of water because if placed in a bathtub the waves bouncing off the wall creates the movement. I'm I correct in the assumption that there is no such device?

Thank you for your time,
C
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on December 24, 2008, 08:24:37 PM
What an interesting question.
You are really asking several questions, that may not be equivalent.

The first question: Is there a working model of an inertial drive?
As the question is commonly understood, the answer is no.

Let's take the other, not exactly equivalent questions.
"shows decrease in weight when placed upon a scale"
Yes, there are many of these, and they are easy to build. Depending on the scale, they show more or less reduction in weight. Some of them even hop up off the ground (during which time the scale would of course read zero, or even negative), or climb inclined planes.

"suspended from a rope"
This is the dreaded "pendulum test" and has been extensively analyzed. Some devices will couple rocking (caused by CG shift) with pendulum swinging, like a child pumping a swing, and may exhibit momentary sideways displacement of the center of mass. But this cannot be sustained. A proper time-averaged observation will show that the center of mass of the system cannot sustain a horizontal displacement.

"large body of water"
This is the "canoe" test, and yes, there are several devices that will make progress under these conditions. They work by exactly the same principle that ice skaters use to accelerate across the "frictionless" surface of the ice. That is, momentary thrust vectors occur that are NOT in the direction of least friction, and the skater (or the "inertial drive" in the canoe) is pushing against this sideways resistance to accelerate along the line of lesser resistance. Strictly in accord with Newton. The water is displaced in the opposite direction and momentum is conserved.

You are welcome.

(You forgot to ask about "torsion" drives a la Tolchin and Shipov, or centrifugal weight-swinging drives, or the latest Tong device from the LTLOT loonies, or ...
They don't work as advertised either.)

 ;)
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on December 25, 2008, 12:53:02 AM
Tinsel,
 Thank you for your response. In your opinion what test or tests would prove beyond any doubt that a ID is working. Sustained levitation? Constant forward movement? or The pendulum test?



C
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on December 25, 2008, 02:14:56 AM
Sustained levitation would (probably) convince even me.

I think it might be possible to fool a pendulum test in certain circumstances. So the length of the pendulum arm should be varied, without changing the parameters of the d.u.t. A true inertial drive won't care about the length of the pendulum.

Constant forward movement is trickier. Many of these devices move quite well, even on _apparently_ frictionless surfaces like air tracks or tables. However, for any particular device, there will be a way to test it that prevents it from reacting against a substrate, or at least allows accounting for the momentum exchanged with a substrate or some part of the environment.

Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: FredWalter on December 26, 2008, 01:33:27 AM
Get yourself a copy of US Patent Application 20080168862 "Inertial Propulsion Device" by Michael K. Walden.

I've exchanged email with him on a mailing list that I moderate, and he claims that his prototype passes the pendulum test.

You can read more about his device in the archives at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Centrifugal_Inertial_Propulsion/messages
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on December 26, 2008, 02:12:33 AM
Good for him. Is there a video that we can watch?

And do you know if he's tried it with different pendulum lengths, without changing the oscillation frequency of the drive?

(Sorry, I just can't crawl through that forum...I'll go blind, I know it.)
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: Yucca on December 27, 2008, 11:24:07 PM
Here´s a system that apparently generates thrust using an asymetric microwave resonance cavity:

http://emdrive.com/

streaming vid of test rig rotating on air bearing:

http://emdrive.com/DMtest188.wmv
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on December 28, 2008, 01:29:10 AM
Shawyer's "EM" drive will soon, I hope, be tested in the definitive environment--outer space.
Smarter people than I have looked at Shawyer's maths and they think there are rather large errors.
I personally don't believe all experimental artifacts have been excluded.
What would be the effect of a tiny pinhole in the container, or an ion wind from some wiring or component at relatively high potential?
I just don't know, but since his math is suspect and the device appears to violate CofM, I'd put money on it being an error of some kind.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: X00013 on December 28, 2008, 03:28:59 AM
Not sure this will help, but i remember watching a tube video about 2 years ago tagged "lost technology" with alot a bits,  showing some guy and his device in a very large pool in the late 70's, patent applied, government dismissed, but the video looked like it worked pretty damn good to me. I just spent an hour tryn to find the vid on the tube to no avail.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: AlanA on December 28, 2008, 11:53:25 AM
Hi,

just have read about the Inertial Propulsion Device from Mr. Walden.
I have downloaded the patent file. But there are so many patent files out there.
What did Mr. Walden said about his device? Has he made a prototype yet?

Regards
Alana
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: Yucca on December 28, 2008, 08:48:59 PM
Shawyer's "EM" drive will soon, I hope, be tested in the definitive environment--outer space.
Smarter people than I have looked at Shawyer's maths and they think there are rather large errors.
I personally don't believe all experimental artifacts have been excluded.
What would be the effect of a tiny pinhole in the container, or an ion wind from some wiring or component at relatively high potential?
I just don't know, but since his math is suspect and the device appears to violate CofM, I'd put money on it being an error of some kind.

I´m not sure whether it works or not either.

If I could see the rotating test rig enclosed in an airtight, grounded rigid shield that rotates with the whole rig and it still rotated then I would say it works. It might be something he should consider doing to improve chances of investment.

Shawyer says that the reason it works is because two seperate inertial frames are set up within the system due to relativistic effects, the maths is way above my head.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: FredWalter on December 30, 2008, 05:20:19 PM
What did Mr. Walden said about his device? Has he made a prototype yet?

He made a prototype, and it behaved as his computer software model predicted, and he says that it passed the pendulum test. However the bearings in his first prototype overheated and damaged the prototype, and I believe that he's waiting for funds to finish making the second prototype.

Now that his patent application has been published, I'm hoping someone else with access to a machine shop can duplicate his prototype (and his success with the pendulum test).
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: AlanA on December 30, 2008, 05:26:33 PM
thanks for the answer FredWalter.

You said Mr. Walten passed the pendulum test. What is the pendulum test? I never heard about such a test (sorry).
For what is it good for? What means that he passed this test?
I'd like to replicate his invention. But there are not enough informations out there (overunity.com). I have the patent file but that's not enough.

Ragards
Andreas
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on December 30, 2008, 08:20:13 PM
Andreas, you might like to look at
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/IPEmain.htm
and
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/test-pm.htm
(scroll down to the Inertial Propulsion section)

Just for starters.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: AlanA on January 01, 2009, 10:50:11 AM
Thanks TinselKoala for the links!
Does Naudins device works like Mr. Waldens invention?
Do you have more information about Waldens device?

Thanks
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on January 01, 2009, 06:21:16 PM
You are welcome.
I don't know how Walden's(or Walten's) device is supposed to work. I haven't been able to locate the patent drawings, nor have I seen a prototype. If anyone can link to the patent, or preferably a clear, walk-around video of the prototype in operation, showing the pendulum deflection, I would be glad to give an opinion.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: AlanA on January 01, 2009, 08:11:31 PM
Hi TinselKoala,

here's the link from where I get patent files: http://patentpdf.net/

Regards
Alana
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on January 03, 2009, 10:59:21 PM
So by looking at all the types of devices I believe no one, has been able to prove anything about inertia drives that would stand up under scrutiny.






C.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: Yucca on January 04, 2009, 02:17:25 AM
So by looking at all the types of devices I believe no one, has been able to prove anything about inertia drives that would stand up under scrutiny.

C.

Maybe this is pushing against aether somehow? I´m sure some will think ion winds coming off the HT supply wire and connector but the movement seems quite dramatic considering no corona can be seen around that part with the lights off.

http://www.helical-structures.org/SARG-effect-page.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2r3tiPDqVE

@broli spotted this and here is his thread:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6465.0;topicseen
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on January 07, 2009, 11:21:31 PM
I ask this of everyone.
Has anyone ever passed these tests (pendulum, etc.) and proved it without there being any doubt?



C.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on January 08, 2009, 04:35:10 AM
I ask this of everyone.
Has anyone ever passed these tests (pendulum, etc.) and proved it without there being any doubt

C.

No.
Some claim to have leapt one or another of the hurdles: linear air tracks, canoes, air tables, carefully tuned pendulums like the Sargoytchev ion thruster in the above video, spring scales, postal scales, pan balances, etc.
But no device passes all tests expected of an inertial or reactionless drive, therefore they are not really passing their individual tests either, just tricking them with mechanical resonances and odd thrust vectors.
Newton still describes our macroscopic, slow, low-gravity world to a T, and hasn't been repealed yet.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on January 14, 2009, 08:15:58 AM
Thank you for answering all my questions. I have but one more, if such a device could be created and passed all tests without there being any doubt as to it's reality. What then would be the monetary value of said device. As in, how and where could it be used. Assuming it was patented, licensed for use and created for mass distribution.





Once again, thank you.

C
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on January 14, 2009, 09:39:06 PM
Such a device would be incredibly useful and significant. It would be the first known violation of the Principle of Conservation of Momentum, for one thing.
It would open up the possibility for development of reactionless power tools for use in free-fall; it would mean that one only needed a power supply, not reaction mass, for space drive thrusters; and it would be the basis for any number of "free energy" machines: since, if you can violate CofM, you can make a perpetual turner, that could be harnessed to output energy for other uses.
Monetary value?
How about saving the world from the tyranny of oil--what's that worth in Zimbabwean dollars?
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: FredWalter on January 16, 2009, 04:33:03 PM
it would be the basis for any number of "free energy" machines: since, if you can violate CofM, you can make a perpetual turner, that could be harnessed to output energy for other uses

I disagree that an inertial thruster would be the basis of any 'free energy' machines.

The law of conservation of (angular) momentum would need to be extended to take into account converting from angular momentum into linear thrust.

Consider E=mc^2 -> under normal circumstances mass is conserved and remains as mass -  however under special circumstances you can convert mass into energy.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: TinselKoala on January 19, 2009, 06:25:02 PM
I disagree that an inertial thruster would be the basis of any 'free energy' machines.

The law of conservation of (angular) momentum would need to be extended to take into account converting from angular momentum into linear thrust.

Consider E=mc^2 -> under normal circumstances mass is conserved and remains as mass -  however under special circumstances you can convert mass into energy.

It would, and this has actually been proven mathematically.
Consider, simply, a thruster that did not eject reaction mass. Mount two of them on the periphery of the disk. Turn it on, stand back.

And Cof M needs no modifications. Angular momentum is defined as the vector cross product of a system or particle's position vector and its linear momentum. If linear momentum is conserved, so is angular momentum. Thrust is a force, that is an acceleration, which is a vector, times a mass.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: currenthopper on July 22, 2009, 08:43:10 AM
What would you consider passing the pendulum test.
Hang the machine from a rope let it hang dead center.
The machine wants to counter rotate so you put a track on both sides of it to stop it from rotating. You mark the center point on the track and center point on the machine. Line both points up and turn on the machine. It pulls to the right about 2 inches and will increase to 4 inches if I turn the machine up. When the machine it stopped it moves back to center. I can do this over and over, let it spin slow and it moves just a little to the right of center spin it up faster and moves many inches and keeps trying to move that way until turned off. It doesn't oscillate it pulls in that one direction until turned off.
What does this mean.
C.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: exnihiloest on July 22, 2009, 10:14:17 AM
It would, and this has actually been proven mathematically.
...

I do not see why. A closed system accelerating by itself, without reaction force, is equivalent in GR to a closed system in free fall in a gravitational field, i.e. there is no force acting, the system follows the geodesics of space time.
Only the relative potential energy is consumed. So if a closed system accelerates by itself, we should think that it transforms its internal energy into a potential energy relative to an external reference frame, in order to generate a g field. Thus this kind of motion does not imply free energy.


Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tinman on September 09, 2013, 09:31:51 AM
As some interest in this was shown in another topic,i thought i would dust the cobwebs of this one-so as to keep on topic.
So as the last post here was back in 2009,dose anyone know of any succesful devices that have been shown since 2009?.

Below is a diagram of what we need to achieve(basicly),so anyone have any idea's as to how we may do this?.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tinman on September 09, 2013, 09:52:44 AM
In the below diagram,we can see what needs to be done.If the reaction force is slightly of 180* to that of the action force,then we have a direction of motion. The direction of motion will be the internal equal divisional angle of that of the action and reaction force. Looking at the pic below,once the pink line of motion reaches the black line-we have no motion.So we only need to deflect the reaction angle by one degree to gain inertia motion at the divisional angle..But how to deflect the reaction angle without it applying a force that is additive to the reaction force?
Ideas anyone?.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tinman on September 09, 2013, 10:09:05 AM
Some video's of so called enertia or reactionless propulsion systems.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0irxkBFS4o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-wdV32hos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4LT3GZjlY&list=PLoUT4a5Zlf7GeW9OODUuqpcrrvsQ1uZ31

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLJDQwHnItA
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tim123 on September 09, 2013, 01:04:35 PM
Very good website on this:
http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/

The Dean Drive:
http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/dean_drive.htm

Excellent source for info on 'Connective Physics' - Inertial Propulsion page:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward133.htm
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tinman on September 09, 2013, 05:39:32 PM
Thanks for the links Tim. I have read the dean drive one,but yet to get to the other two.

Well i have thought about this for the last couple of day's now(not long i know),and believe i have a way to divert the reaction force 90* each way to that of the action force. As we need mass x acceleration to create enertia,we need to find a way to decrease the acceleration on the reaction side,and increase acceleration on the action side(if we wish to use these terms),as the mass we cant change on the fly.The diagram below shows what we need to achieve,and how we increase and decrease acceleration of the masses,while maintaining the same RPM for both.

The problem is we must not have the force needed to do so,acting against our action force. So we need to divert the force required to pull the weights(our mass)closer to the center of the wheel to decrease the  acceleration of that mass,90* to that of our action force (mass).
I believe i have found a way to do this,and have traced all force vector's,to find the net sum of force is zero-which is 90* each way of the action force direction.

As can be seen in the pic,we bring one mass closer to the center of the wheel,and that will decrease in acceleration,while the other mass leaving the wheel, increases in acceleration.
Although the diagram below dosnt depict my exact setup,it is a simple sketch to show how to increase and decrease acceleration of mass ,while maintaining constant RPM.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: tim123 on September 09, 2013, 06:47:25 PM
I have a hypothesis that T Townsend Brown's flying capacitors - & 'Lifters' - is due to an inertial-propulsion effect at the atomic level. Like turning atoms into mini Dean-Drives...

I think the electrostatic field causes the electrons to miss part of their orbits - by quantum effects - so they spend more time at the 'top' of the orbit than at the bottom - and that gives an unbalanced centrifugal force. I can elaborate if anyone's interested.

I think electrostatic inertial propulsion is definitely something I'd like to investigate. I can get about 65Kv out of my wimshurst machine :)

I doubt that a mechanical device would be practical, but I could be wrong... I think it would be possible to build a Dean Drive - using a pair of vibration motors on the inner platform - and a magnet & coil (or 2) as the clutch.
Title: Re: Inertia Drive
Post by: ingyenenergiagep on September 09, 2013, 08:28:12 PM
http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/images/Fundamental%20Anomaly.jpg

Opposite turning wheels: no turning effect-> linear force and motion.

Mass arms rotate down outside with 90 degree acceleration: force up, antigravity.
Mass arm rotate up inside with 90 degree deceleration: force up, antigravity.

90 deg acc down, 90 deg permanent speed, 90 deg dec up, 90 deg low permanent speed, and this again and again.
Give me the Nobel prize.