[geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:16:36 -0700 (PDT)
His web page was updated in 2006
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/update.html
but the last thing i see is dated 2002
http://www.aspden.org/papers/P2002a/Berlin.htm
But he has close ties to Correa and most of his work is tied to/ comes from
that work....so his further detailed explinations may be on one of the dvds..?
http://www.aspden.org/reports/Es8/Rep8.htm
http://www.aetherometry.com/Events/aether_motor_patent_appl.php
lattest pattent as of June 26 2007
http://www.aetherometry.com/Patents/US7235945.pdf
http://www.aetherometry.com/Bookstore/books.html#OrgMotor
----- Original Message ----
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 8:36:01 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
Me in blue...
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Robert Bennett <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 5:01:26 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
Flywheel and the aether.
Allen , thanks again for the information below.. I would like to discuss some
anomalies which caused confusion, at least my confusion. I post with my
comments the portion of his text which you provided that relates to our
flywheel aether experiment. A careful read here does not show any power gain
at all, but rather merely serves to show some effect of the vacuum or
aether..WHICH IS FINE. But I see no practical advantage. YET ! LOL.
History has shown that as with many experiments, valid results do not always
translate into valid or best answers to the world around us. He has his own
"free energy" ax to grind i guess......That does not bother me it is just not a
real concern of mine....(I have other oppinons on all that)............. Also I
think that even if "ZPE" were possible we are not there yet and there is still
too much confusion/ lack of understanding of what the aether is and is not and
how it all works...So how all of this affects the ZPE and "free energy" debate
and wether or not there is an "additional power advantage" is well as far as I
am concerned irrelevant right now.
ASPDEN: DISCOVERY OF 'VIRTUAL INERTIA'
I report an anomalous energy phenomenon found in my motor experiments.
Imagine an electric machine having no electrical input itself and which, when
started on no load by a drive motor and brought up to speed (3250 rpm),
thereafter runs steadily at that speed with the motor drawing a little extra
input power with a time delay rate of about two minutes. The machine rotor has
a mass of 800 gm and at that speed its kinetic energy together with that of the
drive motor is no more than 15 joules, contrasting with the excess energy of
300 joules needed to satisfy the anomalous power surge [to spin up from rest].
Here he does give the kinetic energy of the rotating system as 15 joules, which
we may safely assume is all that one could expect back in unloading the system
.
What he is saying it seems, that an enormous amount of power some 300 Joules is
needed to bring it up to speed in the first instance
But that in any subsequent start, providing it is done within a minute or so,
only 30joules is required, and what is more critical, that it does not matter
which direction. He continues: Yes, that personaly bothers me for some
reason.....but even if it does not make a difference I wonder if one direction
is easier then the other.....is there is a directional bias...?
Imagine further that when the motor, after running five minutes or more, is
switched off and the machine is stopped, you can restart it in the same or
opposite direction and find that it now has a memory in the sense that it will
not now ask for that 300 joules of excess input. 30 joules will suffice
provided that the time lapse between starting and restarting is no more than a
minute or so.
His excitement, and so should be ours, is the implication of some aetheric
medium which is displaced from the space wherein the flywheel occupies, which
takes some time to return to equilibrium. Hence the second start takes less
power in either direction.. (analogous to having less 'water' to spin in. )
Agreed...
This is not a transient heating phenomenon. At all times the bearing housings
feel cool and any heating in the drive motor would imply an increase of
resistance and a build-up of power to a higher steady state condition.
The experimental evidence is that there is something spinning of an ethereal
nature coextensive with the machine rotor. That 'something' has an effective
mass density 20 times that of the rotor, but it is something that can spin
independently and take several minutes to decay, whereas the motor comes to
rest in a few seconds.
That does not compute because of the "either direction" property. Again i think
we need more work ..is there a directional bias even if it is smaller then the
overall effect?.....It must spin yes, but be pushed away like as by centrifugal
force, leaving true empty vacuum behind, hence the lower resistance to spinup
in either direction.
Two machines of different rotor size and composition reveal the phenomenon and
tests indicate variations with time of day and compass orientation of the spin
axis.
This latter would occur if as I hypothesise that the aether has a 24 hour
rotation around the world, (or the converse) and also gravitation effects due
to the sun and moon. Well experiments show that the rotaion is "sidreal
timed"..ummm..that is to say there is a detectable correlation to sidreal time
which means the rotation must be of steller origin not teresterial.....ie
Roland Dewitte 1991
One machine, the one incorporating weaker magnets, showed evidence of gaining
strength magnetically, as the test were repeated over several days.
This seems to indicate he used DC machines. Bad move. A characteristic of DC
motors is to re-inforce their fields, and are not usually permanent magnets in
any case.
So this is not a free energy machine. Howls of dissappointment. Yea i dont
think give that whole free energy machine a whole lot of thought ....we dont
know enouph about the aether yet to "extract" anything from it
yet.................. for crying out loud most people either dont know it exist
or as in the case of MS for the most part ignore and attempt to find
explintions of things wihout it, thus for all practical purposes deny it even
exist................Yet it still so conflicts with what science tells us I
must still do the experiment to prove it. In any case he writes in a confusing
manner.. Why the 2 motors? why not just one with a flywheel? Why the 3250 rpm
which just happens to coincide with the 2pole synch speed of 50hz AC. I think
it is just the best possible configuration for the experiment he came up with (
get the bet results)...one idea is that the interation of mass and eather in
these types of configurations are sinsitive to
frequencies and relationships fo thoese frequencies to the mass you are
attempting to get interaction from.......
One other point Allen, which the above causes me to ask, Aspden said , I will
soon be reporting in detail on these findings, after further work and
evaluation of the implications.
I cant find it can you?
I'll look around...but he is realy old now....i dont even know if is contact
info is still any good.....
Phil.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 3:19 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
The Aspden Effect http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/Le30/le30.html
THE ADAMS-ASPDEN MOTOR PATENT http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le08.htm
UC Riverside confirmation of electostatic
spin........www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/ display.cgi?id=548
How to get intouch with Aspden address and phone number.....
http://www.aetherometry.com/Labofex_Plasma_Physics/aspden_opinion.php
MARINOV'S AMPERE BRIDGE MOTOR http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le25.htm
FYI.......
The following was extracted from "THE SECRET OF THE CREATIVE VACUUM"
by John Davidson. It describes a simple but impressive experiment
that can be performed by anyone.
The Levitating Gyroscope
Professor Eric Laithwaite, Harold Aspden and the Gyroscope
As we have said, the fundamental law of all differentiated forms is
polarity or duality. It arises automatically when the One is first
overlain by the greater, Formative Mind and is multiplied and
endlessly reflected from that point into the myriad forms familiar
to us. Yet the underlying and primal polarity remains clearly
identifiable in all manifestation, even amongst the manyness in
which we presently find ourselves.
In our physics, whether conventional or vacuum state, the same
applies. All forms are interconnected and interwoven with this law
of polarity and causality. Electrostatic charge, magnetic polarity,
gravitational attraction, all these produce and are a part of the
rotation which maintains things in existence. They are all aspects
of patterning in the kaleidoscopic image we call our physical world
and think to be so real. And they are thus all related.
The one can be expressed as the other if only we can see how the
image is projected and can see how to tweak the projection system.
So motion expressed as shape and rhythm - as differentiation in
space and time - is so familiar to us that we feel that it can hold
no secrets. Yet since motion is our observation of patterns in
space and time - both intrinsic physical realities we do not really
comprehend - one cannot say that the true nature of motion is known
to us. So if certain kinds of motion produce certain unexpected
results, this is no more than we should expect, for we do not
understand how time and space have come into being in the first
place.
It is not surprising therefore that Searl, Schauberger, Saxl and
others have found intriguing and unexpected effects and
relationships. Nor are such phenomena confined to the work of
independent researchers, for in recent years work in our British
universities has demonstrated the same effect.
Four of the principle protagonists have been Professor Eric
Laithwaite, Dr. Harold Aspden, Sandy Kidd and Scott Strachan. Eric
Page 1
Laithwaite, from London University's Imperial College, has been
involved with research into magnetic levitation and gyroscope
research for many years. Harold Aspden, from the Univeristy of
Southampton, describes a simple and crucial experiment, demonstrated
for him by Professor Laithwaite.
The facts of the experiment are so remarkable that they would be
unbelievable to anyone who has not witnessed at close quarters the
demonstration by Professor Laithwaite.
He takes hold of a shaft with two hands, holding it horizontally at
knee height. An assistant then uses a power tool to spin a 50 pound
flywheel at one end of the shaft until it is rotating at several
thousand revolutions per minute.
A 50 pound wheel rotating at this speed and held away from, but
necessarily close to, the body commands respect for the dangers
involved. It is not something that one expects to manipulate with
ease. However, one is aware that one could release the hold near
the wheel and expect to be able to support the full weight of the
system by one's other hand, without having to exert a couple
manually via one's wrist, (ie. without needing to strain one's wrist
to hold the shaft horizontal with the 50 pound weight on the other
end).
Indeed, it would lie outside the capacity of human strength to apply
such a twist to the shaft axis. What should then happen is that the
wheel will precess* continuously in a horizontal plane, requiring
the holder to turn around with it, keeping a firm grip on the end of
the shaft.
* precession means that the shaft - the axis of rotation -
'fixed' at one end by one's wrist, will describe a shape
like that of a cone - or a hyperbolic spiral.
What is found, however, is that the free end of the shaft lifts with
very little effort, totally incommensurate with the 50 pound weight
at an angle of 32 degrees, which also happens to be the helix angle
of 'type A' DNA, angle 32.7 degrees.
This angle appears to be a fundamental constant and based on the
reduced lifting force required when a rotating mass is lifted at
this angle, it appears to have free energy and anti-gravity
applications.
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 12:38:56 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
THE ASPDEN EFFECT:
This experiment involved a gyroscope whose central wheel was fashioned from a
powerful magnet
Allen A link to a page where this can be examined would be nice Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 6:49 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel
THE ASPDEN EFFECT:
This experiment involved a gyroscope whose central wheel was fashioned from a
powerful magnet.
The normal amount of energy that would be required to rotate the gyroscope to a
certain maximum speed was 1000 joules. Like a glass of water being stirred up
with a spoon, the rotation of the gyroscope would cause the aetheric energy
inside its central wheel to begin spiraling, and this churning movement would
continue inside the object even once Dr. Aspden brought the gyroscope to a stop.
Surprisingly, for up to 60 seconds after Aspden’s gyroscope stopped rotating,
it would take ten times less energy to return it to the same velocity as it had
attained the first time – only 100 joules.
This is another reproducible effect that has simply been ignored by the
mainstream, because it “violates the laws of physics.”
Kozyrev showed that lead (Pb) maintained its latent forces for 14 seconds and
aluminum for 28, and yet Dr. Aspden’s gyroscopes would retain their forces for
a full 60 seconds.
Dr. Nikolai A. Kozyrev
1.10 KOZYREV’S RESULTS HAVE BEEN REPLICATED, NEVER DISPROVEN
No concrete disproof of N.A. Kozyrev and V.V. Nasonov’s experimental results
exists (Levich, 1996). Independent groups of researchers have now reproduced
and confirmed some of Kozyrev’s experiments. These include A.I. Veinik from the
1960s-1980s, Lavrentyev, Yeganova et al. in 1990, Lavrentyev, Gusev et al. in
1990, and Lavrentyev et al. in 1991 and 1992. American researcher Don Savage
has also replicated much of Kozyrev’s work and published it in Speculations in
Science and Tech.
Furthermore, without any knowledge of Kozyrev’s work, in 1989 G. Hayasaka and
S. Tekeyuchi discovered similar weight-loss effects with rotating 150-gram
gyroscopes, and more recently obtained success by dropping the gyroscopes
between two precision laser beam detectors.
(Remember that a gyroscope that is being weighed in a rotating and non-rotating
state will not show any measurable weight changes unless an additional process
is introduced such as vibration, movement, (in this case dropping,) heat
conduction or electric current transition.)
The results of Hayasaka et al.’s study, conducted on behalf of the Mitsubishi
corporation, actually did make it into the mainstream media, surprisingly
enough. Furthermore, they did indeed attribute their results to the effects of
torsion fields.
Many other researchers such as Dr. S.M. Polyakov, Dr. Bruce DePalma and Sandy
Kidd have independently discovered gravitational changes with gyroscopes, but
it appears that most of them have not fully understood the fluidlike nature of
the aether, which always travels in the spiraling movement of torsion waves.
Figure 1.5 – Data of Dr. Bruce DePalma’s Spinning Ball Experiment
from Hoagland’s 1992 UN Briefing
A perfect example of harnessing torsion waves by rotation was discovered
completely independently by Dr. Bruce DePalma, frequently cited by R.C.
Hoagland et al. on the Enterprise Mission website. Within a complete vacuum,
DePalma took two steel balls and catapulted them into the air at equal angles,
with an equal amount of force.
The only difference was that one ball was rotating 27,000 times per minute and
the other was stationary. The rotating ball traveled higher into the air and
then descended faster than its counterpart, which violated all known laws of
physics.
The only explanation for this effect is that both balls are drawing energy into
themselves from an unseen source, and the rotating ball is thus “soaking up”
more of this energy than its counterpart – energy that would normally exist as
gravity, moving down into the earth.
With the addition of torsion-field research we can see that the spinning ball
was able to harness naturally spiraling torsion waves in its environment, which
gave it an additional supply of energy.
Other related posts:
