[geocentrism] rotation

From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 09:47:33 +1000


I was reluctant to continue this theme, if it was not for it being important to 
the understanding of celestial mechanics, important if we are to have 
credibility in the subject of geocentrism.  Allen confused and refuted the 
issue, by mentioning force is not motion. In my numerous ventures into finding 
that "free" energy, I did a magnetic experiment which I hope clarifies what I'm 
saying. 

A rotational force applied will not make motion if the axel is locked. But this 
does not mean the axis of rotation does not exist. It is a force vector with a 
quantity which can be expressed as stress.   In the accompanying diagram, I had 
a magnet, the blue N red S rectangle .  which could spin on the axel shown, 
which was on the periphery of the yellow wheel also free to spin. 

The direction of the magnetic cross field is such that a turning torque is 
applied to the magnet. If the magnet bearing is free, the magnet will turn 
clockwise. The yellow wheel remains stationary .. we have one axis of rotation. 

However if the magnet bearing is locked, this same torque will turn the whole 
wheel clockwise. We have two axis of rotation in the same clockwise direction. 
One is a force vector centered on axis of the magnets achieving its rotational 
motion by means of translation, and the other of course is fixed on the axis of 
the wheel centre. 

Let us slightly unlock the magnet bearing . In this case some of the energy 
will turn the magnet on the wheel, and some will turn the wheel..  In this case 
you must accept that there are two mechanical rotations..  Why is it so 
difficult to accept when the rotations are synchronised, as in when the bearing 
is locked?  To me this expression is common in the electrical industry when 
referring to the rotor as becoming locked in synchronism with the rotating 
manetic field. 

Things do not change just because the force is mechanical rather than magnetic. 
We could be discussing fluid drives, where the the viscosity is the 
differential.  Yet even in a solid there is elasticity. the rotational forces 
on the molecules at the periphery  of a system will indeed stress (a movement) 
in the rotational direction, just as my magnet above. 

Yet in the moon, where Allen refuses to budge, we have a free synchronous 
independent rotation which is synchronisd with the orbital rotation, (yes an 
imaginary wheel,) The moon has two motions..  one of the translation of its 
mass around a central axis... and at the same time it has a physical rotation 
around its own axis in synchronism.. , one that slips into and out of synch at 
various times ever so slightly.

I have shown by these experimental proofs,  how forces of rotation exist during 
this synchronous phase, reflected in actual movement or stress within the 
molecules of materials.. on my earth bound model..  Surely Allen you are not 
going to resort to claiming I am wrong as regards the moon, because we cannot 
go there and measure this centrepetal  stress in the rocks? 

Philip.
Attachment: rotation.GIF
Description: GIF image
[geocentrism] rotation

Other related posts:
