[geocentrism] Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL.

From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL.
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 2:37 PM

--- On Fri, 12/5/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 2:14 PM  “They may force you to see how a mass on the periphery of a plate can be rotating,  or not rotating on a separate but parallel axis.” I don’t see or know where or  how you got the idea that I denied that??  Allen.    Of course you don't..  My statement was ill conceived.  Let me re correct it.   “They may enlighten  you to see how a mass on the periphery of a plate can be rotating, whilst locked in the media or not rotating when free within the media. on a separate but parallel axis .   explanation:  When the bearings are locked, the blue discs are identical to being a part of the "plate" you are talking about. and which you call one rotation.   I still maintain there are two rotations actually many possible.. all on separate axis, within any rotating plate, depending upon what geometrical centre you select for examination.   By having a bearing in the test, which can be locked/unlocked, I have simulated a condition wherby, the effect is as though I had separated the molecules of a circular area in the periphery of your plate, from any cohesion with the rest of the plate. which allowed the separate axial rotation to be demonstrated.  Demon?  whats he doing there?   recall your comment: If I am correct, they will all suddenly accelerate up to high speed RPM. because of the rotating inertia still within their mass. I would agree with that…but what does that tell you? Allen   It should tell you, that the molecules within the test circle have a rotating inertial force present within the solid plate, which are enabled to show itself the moment it is unlocked and freed from any cohesion, thus resulting in the spin up which you just agreed would happen..  Mind you I am yet to verify this by actual experiment..    Dont knock the math..  Mathmatics is the only way we can know the actual energy in joules being involved in each test. I am pleased to see this has even given Paul a jolt..  He missed the point all together..  Be clearer inthe morning Paul.  Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 6:51 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. Phil, If I am correct, they will all suddenly accelerate up to high speed RPM. because of the rotating inertia still within their mass. I would agree with that…but what does that tell you? “They may force you to see how a mass on the periphery of a plate can be rotating,  or not rotating on a separate but parallel axis.” I don’t see or know where or  how you got the idea that I denied that?? --- On Fri, 12/5/08, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:49 PM     --- On Fri, 12/5/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:35 PM  Allen the first questions are straight forward..   Yess others hae come to mind, but I'm keeping this as less complicated as possible. e.g. They may force you to see how a mass on the periphery of a plate can be rotating,  or not rotating on a separate but parallel axis.   No3.      Speed the yellow disc up to 3000 rpm with the blue bearings seized up .. this is where I claimed the blue discs are rotating synchronously with their orbits.   At this point release the bearings. Ignoring friction losses, for some seconds of time nothing will change.  During this period, suddenly brake and stop the yellow wheel. What will the blue wheels do?  If I am correct, they will all suddenly accelerate up to high speed RPM. because of the rotating inertia still within their mass.   I am yet to do a simple test on my turntable to prove this soon.   Philip. ----- Original Message ----- From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 5:29 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. Phil, Depalma and Aspend effects come to mind…they need to be taken into consideration.....Paul might be right but then again how those "anomalies would or world not affect your experiment would be interesting to know for sure....I might be able to get the figures from GWW for each effect...i don’t know if it would change the outcome....However, in any case I think that would be a interesting experiment and would need a actual experiment performed in the  real world where "anomalies are free to exercise..........not just all the usual and assumed physics math thrown at it.... It might be a worthwhile experiment but a complicated one for sure in trying to isolate all the variables...... --- On Fri, 12/5/08, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 11:28 AM --- On Fri, 12/5/08, Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL. To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 5:37 AM Philip M It's obvious. I don't need maths. It takes energy to bring a disk up to some radial velocity. It also takes energy to bring a mass up to some  linear velocity. If you only have to bring some part of the disk to a given radial velocity -- the yellow bit -- with the rest -- the blue bits -- only being brought up to a linear velocity (doesn't matter that it's on a circular path) then it's obvious that more energy will be required if your bearings are seized up.   Take the case where the blue weights are mounted, not on the periphery, but on the central shaft. If the bearings are free, then they will be still but if they are seized up, then they would require energy to spin them up.   In each case the linear velocity is a constant but the angular velocity differs.   Paul D From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism list <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Robert Bennett <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, 5 December, 2008 12:56:52 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Flywheel experiment. urgent for ALL.  This may be an amazing revelation.. I want some PH D math experts to solve it.. My experiment is based on a real test.. It does what I say it does. No illusions.  Please notice also for the conservative types... A new rule of presenting text... two or more full stops like this....replaces the need for a capital beginning the next phrase or sentence. Good idea HUH?  and efficient...COZ MY SHIFT KEY IS FALTERING     Perhaps it is the electrical training/education/asimov scienc fiction/ I received, but when I see the universe, I can see it as it really is, rather than to what my eyes limit me.  There is no such thing as a solid..  It is all space... the only difference between space as in "outer space", and a solid,  is that in the world, space  is a bit more crowded. Molecules are galaxies.  and they are in space. It all may come down to electrical charges..  spaced around .  (pun intended)   Therefore, when the world rotates, (should I say when an object like a plate rotates, because this world is unique) I see this molecule on the edge turning with it, and presenting the same face to the centre. Some cohesive force not gravity is causing this..  but the atoms have their own separate rotations within this structure. This cohesive force is/maybe included in what loads up the flywheel energy inherent to a spinning body of mass.   If this cohesion was non existent then the flywheel theory would collapse or alter..  Thanks to Allens obstropolism, I have an idea....And while I am here, Allen, an axis like a line or a point has no dimension. It is a geometrical tool. at least when I ever refer to the term.... different entirely to an axel which has dimension.   Can we model this as an experimental proof? I tried this experiment in simple form..it works.  The wheel below in the diagram, or attached if not in view, we have all the grey circles as axels . The yellow circle represents a large disc or flywheel. On the rim of this flywheel are shown in blue four heavy 5kg discs ..centered 1 meter out .  But keep in mind that we would consider an even amount of weights all around the rim for balance.  In this diagram the weights are locked to their shafts and cannot turn independently hence the black bars show the constant  positions as the blue wheels are forced to rotate with the main wheel...always facing the centre.  . The problem is an easy mathmatical question for a phd math man. grin! Ive seen the pages of solutions to the flywheel. We are considering two sets of conditions.   1.    Spinning the wheel at 3000rpm with all the blue weights/wheels locked to their shafts. and again ,   2.    Spinning the wheel at 3000rpm with all the blue wheels free to rotate on negligible/frictionless shafts.   Will there be any difference in the amount of energy needed to bring the wheel up to its set speed of 3000 rpm in each case, and what will be the difference?     It is my contention/guess and indicated under test, that in the second test the blue wheels will not alter their orientation, that their inertia will keep them always facing the same direction... these weights will have no spin. but they will "experience" a shaft that is spinning at 3000rpm on their bearing points. That latter is definite and true. easily proven by any on this list . My conclusion, but needs demonstrating by measured evidence, The first test, No 1. will take more power to reach full speed, than does test 2. This is because the first test requires all the weights to spin on their own centres at the periphery at 3000rpm. The energy dynamics are different. What is the recoverable energy from each test?  If both tests reveal the same input and output power, for the flywheel theory, as it is identical mass in orbital motion/rotation, we have a mystery. If both tests reveal the same input power, we have a mystery, then Paul and I have a problem with our rotation philosophy...     If so, then we have a delemma..  well we have a delemma either way!  this is the same flywheel doing identical speeds with identical peripheral mass.. But the dynamics of experiment 1. involve additional energy stored in the mass of the blue wheels, which are physically rotating in their own space, whilst the blue wheels in experiment 2 are not so rotating. We have the further proof of the extra loading, by considering the implication of gumming up the bearings and so loading them with controllable torque.   The math experts can have fun with this..  Ok I send a pic for the other position No 2 in the attachment as well..  Philip.  Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now.