[geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 08:56:09 +1000
Reading this, my highlights, its obvious the accelerometer is not really a
true accelerometer. very limited... is this all they got? . Laser was just
more sophisticated, and I find no reference to a tunnelling type? Phil.
An accelerometer is a device for measuring specific external force (force over
mass which has the units of acceleration) on the accelerometer. For a freely
moving object, the output of the accelerometer is off from the true accleration
by a 1 g factor in the local vertical axis and it must be added for the
inertial navigation solution by a model of the earth gravitation acceleration.
In the other non-vertical axis the accelerometer measures acceleration and the
equivalent specific external force. Counterintuitively??, a sensor at rest on
the earth's surface will indicate the acceleration of gravity, 1 g, because it
is reading the ground reaction force and zero during free fall in a vaccuum.
The accelerometer can not measure internal forces such as gravity directly. If
aerodynamic resistance is present during the free-fall it will record the
acceleration due the air drag. Single- and multi-axis models are available to
detect magnitude and direction of the acceleration. Accelerometers can be used
to sense inclination, vibration, and shock. They may be part of an Inertial
Navigation System and are increasingly present in portable electronic devices,
where they may be used to sense user input through motion.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 12:44 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs
Allen D
OK -- I looked here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagnac_effect and it
confirms my understanding of Sagnac Effect (at least that part which I
understand does -- the maths is beyond me) and I can't see why you would quote
this in defence of your assertion that a quantum tunnelling accelerometer will
indicate acceleration in free-fall.
You did not quarrel with my simplification that ' ... it is still a mass on
a spring!' so I discern your acceptance. I still want an explanation from you
as to how a mass on a spring in a falling bomb case can indicate the local
value of g (friction = zero).
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 13 March, 2008 6:19:44 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs
Paul.. a free fall does not prevent you from measruing an acceleration
period. Who in the world told you that....an accidemic or a theorotician
certainly not anyone doing pratical real work with free falling objects becasue
we can and do all day long?....That is the point to Sagnac 1913 suggest you
look it up.........That assertion is based on GTR it is and was proven wrong.
alas but then came STR it was invented to explain why that was still true even
though experiments using light showed otherwise.....it did so by attempting to
create "Inertial ref frames" for eletromagnetic radiation as well....alas
but...that too was proven wrong too!... The only ones who accept & invoke it as
gosple truth are theoreticans and acidemics. However, since the only other
alternitive is to admit a stationary earth ......GTR & STR are thus the stus
quo and will remain so untill somthing else can be found more phylosphicaly
acceptable to explain why the earth only appears at the center of a universe
staionary and only appears to have the/any and only motion relating to the
earth measured sidrealy not annualy. STR attempted such an explination by
ignoring or denying that any motion at all was and is ever measured coz it is
in free fall/ inertial fames....but anyone who actualy performs an experiment
with acceleration of objects in freefall knows that is absolutly not
true!?..........You don't see you are using GTR axioms (statments of faith) to
prop up the GTR Conclusion but you must use the GTR conclusion to "support" the
axiom. GTR and STR have absolutly no foundation to them whatsoever without
invoking the "Coperican principle" that was the whole point of their
developement by Einstine and crew in the late 19th and early 20th century...?
The problem is you can't invoke the very principle you are trying to "prove" or
hold as self evident as the foundation for the theory that supposedly proves
your principle...... that is not proof that is a circular falicy built opon
faith in the copernican principle. the experiments show that objects in free
fall the acceleration can be measured w/ort to anything outside of that free
falling object.....!? Proof is in the application not in the theoretical and
acidmemic retoric..... We do it all the time.... you can take a gyro that is
not in motion here on the earth turn it off then turn it on once the
freefalling object reaches its terminal velocity and
.............wholaaaa......... i can tell you for a fact what the exact
velocity and accelertaion of that free falling object is.......take that same
gyro in object turn it back off and now put it into space....now turn it on...I
can tell you the same things... acceleration and velocity if any and the
difference between what it was before........................ You guys don't
realise you are confusing text book assertions with the practical
appications.....
----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:17:18 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs
Allen D
Concerning "Title:Quantum tunneling cantilever accelerometer" -- thank you
for your agreement.
My reading of this document tells me that it remains, for all its
sensitivity, a mass on a spring. It may indeed register the tiniest of
accelerations, but it will still read zero if it is not being accelerated.
Wouldn't be much use if it did would it?
As I don't have any idea how you expect it to read acceleration in free fall,
why don't you favour us all with a short, concise, lucid explanation of how you
understand this happening. I'm sure we'd all appreciate that.
And as you raised the matter, a similar explanation of the uses of your
favourite super-sensitive gyroscope would, I'm sure, also be appreciated by
all.
In case you have any doubts here, for mine, Regner said it all.
Paul D
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1328 - Release Date: 13/03/2008
11:31 AM
Other related posts:
