# [geocentrism] Re: On the flywheel and Aspden

• From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:20:39 +0000 (GMT)
```Philip M
This is something one can get one's teeth into! I'm interested.
May I make a suggestion or two? Going the electrical route does indeed involve
you in some nice measurements and calculations -- measuring power consumption
(energy) is complex and I doubt not that it will cause you significant
headaches. A much simpler approach, which avoids all those complications, is
the mechanical method. For instance, if you have a bench grinder, take the
stone off one end and fit a pulley (it doesn't have to be too precise). Wind a
string of suitable length with a knot at the end around the pulley, crossing
the string at the end of the first turn just behind the knot. Then wind all the
string on the pulley except for enough to allow a weight to be attached and
suspended over an idler pulley. Now release the weight. It will fall towards
the ground, radially accelerating the motor, shaft and the other stone. If the
string is the right length, it will fall off the pulley before the weight hits
the ground. By judicious choice of the
accelerating mass, you can arrange that the time of fall is sufficiently long
as to minimise errors in recording the time taken. Don't forget to leave the
power switch at 'off'.
With this approach, the energy imparted is easily calculated and always
constant. If Aspden is correct, the time taken for the weight and string to
fall off the pulley will be significantly less on the second of two closely
spaced tests. I'm betting he's wrong, and that all tests no matter when made
will, within the margin for error, return the same results!
I have an old 12" 2.5kg aluminium turntable which would do admirably for these
tests but sadly I don't have a stopwatch. This mechanism has the advantage that
it would be simple to change the direction of spin and the orientation angle of
the flywheel. I'd bet this would also have no effect.
Paul D

----- Original Message ----
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 10 March, 2008 11:52:13 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] On the flywheel and Aspden

Philip. Often you throw posts in that have awful spelling, non-existent
punctuation, mixed-up font sizes and the like......Neville.

Aw! ere!  come orf it mate! All my posts are exquisately planned. korrect
spelling isn't necessary.

I have diverted our personal debate with you to a direct line...

This week I laid the ground work to do an experiment to prove Aspdens Flywheel
claim, as mentioned  in GWW, and elsewhere. i.e. That a flywheel requires much
less energy to restore its speed after an initial speedup and shut down,
provided the restart was done immediately. (nominally within 2 minutes)

This is important as it is a proof of the aether effect which I think is
essential to geocentrism.

Getting the hardwhere was easy.. Its the electronics for measurement that is
delaying any result. However I did a quickie test with my bench grinder, which
is essentially a flywheel. At first switch on, it took 2 seconds approx to
reach max rpm. Immediate stop with a wood block, and it took 2 seconds approx
to reach full rpm on the second start..  and the third and the fourth etc.
According to Aspden the second et al start should have taken less than a
second.

The result  is what my standard physics would expect..  I guess Aspden has had
me dreaming for a long time about nonsense.

However just in case the timing was due to motor characteristics, I will
proceed to the next step..  Will keep you informed..

Philip.

Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail

```